Parents can "opt out" of President's education speech, says CO school district

Source: WestWord

"Douglas County school allows parents to opt out of letting their kids watch President Obama's speech to the nation's schoolchildren"

Read more: http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2009/09/douglas_county_school_allows_p.php

---

Here is Douglas County School District's permission slip:

http://www.dcsdk12.org/portal/page/portal/DCSD/Communications/Timely_Topics


Racist organizations are behind this....

from seeing a black guy as president.

except that ignorance costs us all in the end because the ignorant have an equal right to vote with the rest of us.

Besides, if their children manage to get some sort of education, they'll likely realize just how lame their parents are and rebel.

that these people would hate the idea of a black man lecturing them about working hard and getting a good education. Why is that needed when you have MSM to feed your mind?

I say, good, we will move forward without them.

children of racist haters. I don't recall a mass movement to keep Chimpy from addressing children. Or any other previous President. Now, what did all those other Presidents have in common that afforded them so much deference and respect...drawing a blank here...

That should fuck with their heads.

Besides, I had to listen to at least 3 of Reagan's bullshit at school

don't recall anyone getting angry about her anti-drug "brainwashing".

Start with just a whisper and it will sound like a siren by the time it cycles through the echo chamber.

Indeed, go fuck with their empty heads.

a message encouraging hard work and academic excellence! Cronyism and ignorance is the way to go! Just ask George Bush. "Is our children learning?"

And I'm sure that was with tutoring. The wingers are probably thrilled if their kids can manage a 'C'.

no surprise here.

Some religions would not approve of their children viewing this speech. And I can guarantee that if Bush had done this I would have wanted to opt my own children out.

Schools often arrange alternative activities and give this choice to parents. It's really not a big deal at all.

It's the lack of respect inherent in the decision to keep children away from hearing our President even with a non-controversial topic. I would not have kept my kids away from a Bush speech, no matter how much I disagreed, unless it was something like encouraging them to join up and die in Iraq. In fact, I brought them to hear a Bush speech in person, because he was the President, and you don't get that opportunity often.

I would have preferred my kids sit in the library and read a book than listen to that brainless twit. I also never saw him as a good role model for kids.

The Obama administration is touting the September 8 address as the first-ever presidential speech aimed directly at schoolchildren. That's debatable: In October 2001, President George W. Bush called on every American child to donate a dollar each to needy kids in Afghanistan.

Their concerns and subsequent actions are all based on lies and misinterpretation.

School districts must respect all parental wishes. And unless we know for sure, I don't see how we can assume they are respecting the wishes of the parents who don't like or respect Obama for political reasons. Like I said, I have had several students over my 30 year career who belong to religions that forbid watching the president or participating in the political process in any way. We had a couple last year who did not watch the inauguration at school for religious reasons. And they weren't racists, they were from devoutly religious families.

No sarcasm; honest question, if you know.

I think it's a branch of Jehovas Witnesses because these kids also don't say the pledge or celebrate birthdays or holidays.

I can surmise that one RW talkie or another has pushed this idea as a way to stick it to President Obama and has promoted the idea of liberal indoctrination and the brainwashing of their children.

I still think parents should have a choice. The world is not going to end if every child in America doesn't see Obama on TV Tuesday.

Actually, what struck me is that the whole damn thing sounds like a complete waste of time:

"The President will challenge students to work hard, set educational goals, and take responsibility for their learning. He will also call for a shared responsibility and commitment on the part of students, parents and educators to ensure that every child in every school receives the best education possible so they can compete in the global economy for good jobs and live rewarding and productive lives as American citizens."

Blah, blah, blah. This is the level of empty blather that staff meetings are made of at my office; it sounds like a damn "mission statement". And politically it comes off as ingratiating and self-serving... a real Eddie Haskell moment.

"The Obama administration is touting the September 8 address as the first-ever presidential speech aimed directly at schoolchildren."

Well maybe it has never been done before because there are more important things to attend to - for both the President and the kids.

I'm a flaming liberal, and this whole thing strikes me as a rather dumb idea.

I just don't think it's fair to leap to the conclusion that schools are allowing kids to opt out just because they don't like Obama. That's silly.

"Some religions would not approve of their children viewing this speech." Is he giving a speech on abortion??? Don't you mean "some racists would not approve of their children viewing this speech"?

I have had several kids over the years whose religion forbids them from voting, or from participating in the political process or saying the pledge or singing patriotic songs. It's not about racism or abortion. It's about being loyal to God or Jesus, and not a country. It's really not all that uncommon.

What religion? Is it your premise that all those parents "opting out" for their kids are doing it for religious reasons? Is being loyal to God/Jesus mutually exclusive from being loyal to ones country? I must have been in a coma for the last eight years (religious = patriotic). Why is it so hard for some people to see/believe/admit that it is racism at play here?

And sitting respectfully listening to a speech is considered worship to them. They place God above elected officials.

I am not saying I agree with them, just that we in the schools need to respect their beliefs. We always provide an opportunity for parents to opt out of special activities, whether it is the president speaking, a birthday party or holiday celebration or special assembly. I guess I got over being shocked by some of their whacky religious beliefs a long time ago. We had some who didn't watch the inauguration last year. I thought that was nutty, since it was so historic. But it isn't up to us to try to talk the parents into letting their kids participate; we need to respect their wishes and provide an alternative activity.

Just wanted to let you know

socialist, anti-religious plot called "evolution." Children should not be exposed to such rubbish...

:sarcasm:

the evolution of ignorance, and how to avoid it.

that's got to be the biggest crock of shit excuse I have heard for not allowing children to hear a politician speak while in school. You do these ignorant dip shits way too much of a favor.... very strange.

You would be amazed by the things parents object to. I had a parent come up to school one December day and go crazy because her daughter had made a Santa Claus out of construction paper for an art project. She was livid. Blew me away.

But we are public servants and have to respect parental wishes. Even if they don't make sense to us.

:)

but you get a big bouquet of respect from me for recognizing that parents, not government, are the final arbiter of their children's activities and participations.

...argument yesterday, here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6446925

They are going to record it and then decide if they will show it.

Schulz just had on a school administrator from MN. They're going to tape the speech, review it, and offer it the next day.

Schulz went ballistic, and good for him!

n.t.

Gotta look for those subliminal messages, you know.

it all makes sense now - they don't show up, they don't achieve greatness - and we all have servants to help out with odd jobs at our beck and call.

thanks GOP - we needed that!

Enough with the equating disagreement with Racism!
That's enough now!

This is getting riduclous

From this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1jEfgya8dI

Chris Mathews saying that First lady having too many aides is racist

To that CNN guy saying that people who say "socialist' it's a secret word for the N-Word!

THAT'S ENOUGHH

You guys are really making the dems look bad with these cheap shots.

I don't want any speech from my president about serving the govt. until they clean the govt. up!
No more bailouts, no Federal Reserve, no Overspending(stimulus) packages, no more cronyism, no more saying we are ending the war in iraq only to move the troops into other countries so it's not a withdraw from iraq but just an expansion into the entire middle east.

NO

No such speech from the govt. until they clean things up!

Whether he is black, white, brown or green I don't care.

ENOUGH with the senseless and baseless accusations.

Imagine if Obama was republican and you guys disagreed with him and the republicans called YOU guys racists because you disagreed with him.

Stop it!

What the hell is happening to this country where the people are supporting public servants telling the public to serve them????

and staying in school?

I mean, who, really, is in favor of education and schooling? So disagreeing with a presidential address advocating those dangerous ideas is a core principle, and not racism according to our brand-new, very concerned poster.

We should just stop it! Because the Republicans aren't racists, and there's really very little evidence, practically none at all, that they are.

and dropping out.

Like the Not Quite Last Church of God in Jesus We'd Trust But He Is A Jew After All.

:popcorn:

During the Primaries, ALL of the fucking guys I work with and yes, you can figure about 100-150
on a daily basis refused to vote for him if he was the nominee. WHY??? "Because I will never vote for a ******." On my mother's grave. They think because I am one of them although I am a woman, I would agree, it made me sick. It still sickens me and this is exactly what it's about.
On a different note, clean up what? You had eight years to do something, you fucked it up.

The RW knows their followers well, and they have given them an excuse to attack our president on anything and everything he does to mask the racism that is really the root cause of much of their anger.

These are the same crazies that attend the teabagging events. The racism and hatred towards President Obama is very evident at these rallies.

I m sick to death of them f----in up our country with their selfish racist bs.

Spewing socalled family values while they are screwing round on their spouses.They are most unchristian.

Piratizing our public coffers to enrich themselves and their corpse buddies.

Treating gay folk like me like we are all molesters.

Preachin Jezzuz while molestin children.

2 uncalled for very expensive wars killing innocents, our own Sons, Daughters, Sisters, Brothers, Fathers and Mothers,and foreigners.

Killing programs that give folks a hand up not a hand out so they can do what with that $.

Stealing from Medicare and Social Security trust funds so they can build more bombs.

Making it easier by deregulation for wall street and our employers to steal our wages and retirement funds.

Killing infrastructure funding so that the bridges and roads crumble.

Gutting funding for education so we get a nation of uneducated so all of the above is easier to do.

Doma

DADT

Blocking ENDA and ERA

Doing everything possible to kill Labor Unions( some are crooked, but they are our best defense against management)

Putting religion before the Constitution.

And being all around jerks.

If you had had the experience with white evilgelical radicals you would understand they ARE a bunch of racists.
Not to generalize , but let's just say a significant portion are.

Like the bunch that tried to burn my house down with a flamin cross, all claimed they were trying to bring gawd to me.
While callin me a N----- lover, faggot, and those were not the worst.

I do want to see our government cleaned up and the corps thrown out on their collective asses, and enact public funding for campaigns.

In fact I have heard several antis say out loud they use any excuse because they are (just barely) smart enough to know that they would get lots of back talk if they stated outright that they cannot stand an African American in the white house. (they did use the n word)

My partner and I were in a restaurant that had been visited the day before by Mr Obama.
When we asked if she had met him she said she stayed home because she could not stand the thought of a .......in the White House and never ever could vote for one.
We left and have not returned to that restaurant, nor will we ever again.

So maybe they aren't racist , but they most certainly are bigoted against poor, people of color, gay people, handicapped, anyone who is different from them or has a librul opinion......

You said it all right there.

:applause:

HE IS THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

We now are going to allow parents to opt out of listening to the President of the United States of America. There is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON FOR IT other than they are racists. It's rediculous.

It has nothing to do with free speach or choice. It's small impressionable kids who are going to be told what when they ask Mommy and Daddy why they can't here the President of the United States Speak?

It's pure hate. It's beyond lying to Grandma and Grandpa about Death Panels. It's teaching their kids that it's okay to hate. KKK.

Small kids don't pay any attention to this crap anyway. Much ado about nothing doesn't even begin to describe this poutrage.

:shrug:

Oh, look, senseless and baseless accusations. According to your logic, Bush should have kept his mouth shut from Sept 11, 2001 until the end of his administration, because he failed to catch bin Laden "dead or alive."

You don't even know what the President is going to say, other than it's a pro-education message, but assume somehow that it's a message "supporting public servants telling the public to serve them"

You're right, of course, in that disagreement does not equal racism, but don't you have to know what he's going to say to know if you disagree? Of course, it's also true that most of the folks disagree with with the Democratic Party today are racists, but correlation is not causation. Stupid people, who are also racist and harbor strange religious ideas, disagree with the President. But it's not that they are stupid or racist or freaky that they do these things: these things just all hang together.

May your short stay be a happy one.

Makes sense -- They hate intellect and hate facts.

And disrespecting the commander in chief of the armed forces is as sure an indicator of the treasonous tendencies of a person as anything else. The parents should be whisked away to a secure government facility as enemy combatants, and subjected to the most enhanced interrogation techniques our faultless, all-American, star-spangled agents can devise so that we can halt the spread of terrorism, blunt the thrust of Al Qaeda seeking to pierce the heart of our beloved country, and root out the hidden persuaders and masters of deceit posing as ordinary citizens.

**Blink, blink**

Did I capture the zeitgeist of the Bush years adequately? Is turnabout still fair play, or did the Republicans repeal that too with the hideously misnamed USA PATRIOT Act?

Obama contributed to the second draft of the patriot act bud
he sponsorded it

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

With the shitty spelling from "you guys" already.

:eyes:

its a hugh ishoo with us.

by our school superintendent Carol Comeau.



I e-mailed her this:

Thank you, Carol Comeau, for being a voice of reason. The disrespect being shown this president by some is appalling. I certainly appreciate your response to these troglodytes.

Blue_in_AK
Mother of three former ASD students
Class of '90, '95 and 2004.

And she responded with this:

Thank you; I am very upset with all of this….in fact, I am in shock.


I really like her style. God knows we've got our pressure from the far right here (witness this summer's battle over equal rights for the GLBT community), but it's always refreshing when officials stand up to them.

Odessa High School Principal Ron Leach said the president’s speech could have educational value, particularly for the social studies teachers with whom he met to discuss this issue, and therefore has not given any “hardcore mandates” about whether teachers should show the president’s speech.

“It’s a current event to us,” Leach said. “It’s not a philosophy. We’re not Republicans or Democrats. As we approach things like that, that’s not different than anything else that happens on a daily basis.”

Because it is rare that a president speaks directly to America’s students in their classroom, he said he appreciates the speech’s potential for historical — and therefore educational — significance and value within pertinent subjects.

So for the most part, Leach said, he is leaving it up to individual teachers to decide.

“Their job is not to direct the opinion with kids but to allow them to discuss it openly,” he said, “not to direct their sense of values.”

As educators, he said, it is teachers’ and administrators’ jobs to give their students an opportunity to learn as much as they can about an issue before coming to their own conclusion about it, whatever that conclusion may be, because that’s a key part of “teaching the democratic process.”

“If it’s not dealt with as a current event and something worth discussing, then we’re missing the boat on what we’re teaching kids,” he said. “Our job is to stimulate discussion and help them become public-minded citizens.”

The bottom line, Leach said, is that “we’re not going to be shutting down school due to this, not by any stretch of the imagination.”

“What’s amazing is kids always surprise you,” he added. “A lot of times they’re smarter than we give them credit for. But they need the opportunity to develop themselves.


http://www.oaoa.com/news/address-36228-presidential-united.html

This is what HE should have done.

:shrug:

I have reached the point that I don't even want to try to talk sense or sanity to them anymore. I moved to a house in the woods so I don't have to deal with em face to face as much and am downright unfriendly to the door to door missionaries any more. ...the 12g seems to frighten them right off!
I don't even have to point it at em. We do have 'No Trespass Signs' up.
Not that I am not downright unfriendly I just have had my fill of it.
When we lived in town (several different owns and cities mind you) it seems that the jezos just 'know' where the gays live and I would have someone or a small group knocking a couple days a week, then tell me we bring gawd..

My answer is usually YOU must be mistaken God is no where and everywhere, hit them with a few Leviticus quotes and close the door. I had even had some foolish enough to stick a foot in my door..which I promptly slammed the door one.

Why is it they cannot understand that we have heard it since runnyraygun and are tired of the insanity and lies ?

(some people using some) Drugs??

Somehow I very, very highly doubt it.
Fuckers.

This is Asinine. In my opinion, it is a civic duty to listen to the President of the United States, if for no other reason than to be informed as to his political stance so that you may know whether or not to support him.

Ignorance is never productive.

People should always be open to listening to political viewpoints, ESPECIALLY opposing political viewpoints. What is there to be gained by listening to your own choir?

You should always listen to the opposition, if for no other reason than to know thy enemy. But who knows, you might (gasp!) learn something.

But listening to a presidential speech should be a choice, not a duty.

mandatory to pay taxes (not optional). It is a desirable "civic duty" to become, and remain, informed. Our Constitution and our unique form of democracy depends on it, and ignorance is not an acceptable excuse for apathy.

I personally do not give a rat's ass if any child listens to a presidential speech, or not. I do, however, give a large rat's ass, when they are prohibited from listening to the POTUS by some small-minded, ignorant, bigoted assholes posing as responsible "parents."

Parents are being allowed to opt their kids out of listening to the president's speech. How is that now being morphed into kids being prohibited from listening??

just answer your own question? Are parents not fostering the ignorance of their children by prohibiting them from listening to a presidential speech? How are these parents different from those who do not want their children to be taught about evolution, or homosexuality, or any other real-world events and facts?

"No honey, mommy and daddy don't want you to listen to the president, because we don't like him. We have decided that it is best for you to remain uninformed and ignorant until you no longer live under our roof. You must also follow in our footsteps about religion, politics, lifestyle, and food preferences, or we will disown you."

That's not prohibition. Prohibition implies massive numbers of kids are not being allowed to participate. And that's not the case.

parental mind-control? What about the child's freedom of choice? If one single parent prohibits a child from learning to keep an open mind about all things, then that child has suffered an injustice. It does not take "massive numbers of kids" to make it wrong!

For you to openly deny the implications of imbuing biased political, religious, or racist mores and thoughts to a child is, to me, unconscionable. If we were talking about pornography, or extreme violence, or any other obviously inappropriate activity, I would agree with you 100%.

We are talking about a speech concerning the importance of education by the President of the United States of America for Christ's sake!

This is a no brainer. Just because you disagree doesn't make it wrong. It's a choice you wouldn't make. Just like celebrating holidays. Does it harm kids when their parents don't celebrate Christmas? It's odd and I don't agree but I would hardly call it harmful.

Besides we have lots bigger problems than this. Schools should air the speech and give the parents the option to opt their kids out. Then the kids who want to see Obama can see him. And the others can do something else.

no brainer for those who think like you, and the neoconservatives who are behind this obvious racist boycott. It is precisely those unfortunate children whose parents are using them as pawns in a right-wing, bigoted, and orchestrated "demonstration," that I feel extremely sorry for. All of your analogies so far have either dealt with religious rights, or parental rights, and have NOT addressed the real issue here, which is outright, and blatant racism -- and children's rights to NOT be exposed to it. It is NOT the content of the speech that these assholes are protesting, it is the African-American President of the United States of America who will deliver it.

Do these same bigoted parents get to opt out from allowing their kids to watch a video showing a speech by Thurgood Marshall, or even the lilly-white George W. Bush? Since when has the teaching of American history been subject to a line-item veto by "parental choice?" What the fuck is next -- book burning? How are these fine, upstanding parents exhibiting different "parenting skills" from those KKK members we see on TV that bring their children to cross burnings, and teach them to hate? They do NOT get to do that with publicly-funded education, in a publicly-funded building, on publicly-funded time!

This trumped-up and Republican-generated "faux-outrage" at a speech by the President of the United States to promote education, and the self-absorbed parents who are using their children as protest signs, is a miserable example to set for impressionable minds. As a long-time teacher, you may see nothing wrong with it, but many of your professional counterparts, and school administrators, throughout this nation vehemently disagree with you. There is a difference between "parenting" and formal education: parenting is done at home and deals with morals and values, while formal education deals with unbiased facts, and is performed in designated schools with publicly-financed materials and teachers.

It also sounds as if you are more than willing to allow the parents of your pupils to dictate the teaching agenda in your locality. It seems to me that the courts have struck down many attempts by Bible-thumpers to impose their agenda on publicly-financed education. Why would they rule any differently against religious and racist bigots? If we were talking about private schools, there may be "legal" wiggle room, but it would still amount to racism.

And lastly, what the fuck does celebrating Christmas (or ANY commercial/religious holiday) have to do with anything we're discussing on this thread? Santa Claus is a ficticious character, while President Obama (much to the dismay of rednecks) is a real person of significant historical standing.

<It also sounds as if you are more than willing to allow the parents of your pupils to dictate the teaching agenda in your locality.>

Yes I am. Just like I wanted a say in what my own kids were taught when they were in school. Local control is what makes public schools - well, public schools. :)

does not include the "right" of censorship (or favoritism) based on religion, race, sexual orientation, or political affiliation, as has been evidenced by the courts time and time again. The teaching of the science of evolution, as opposed to a belief in creationism is a prime example.

Also, "local control" is normally accomplished by a school board, with input by the local PTA, and establishes rules and policy at scheduled democratic settings. "Local control" does NOT normally include individual parents interfering with school administration and teachers on an ad hoc basis, or making demands and influencing decisions based on racism or partisan politics. Thank goodness the majority of our country can separate hate and bigotry from public education. The small percentage of racists around this nation really stick out like the sore thumbs they are, but not so blatantly since the pre-civil rights era. All that is missing are the "Whites Only" signs.

Why do you keep ignoring the "racism" elephant in the room, and continue to pretend that this has anything at all to do with the simple exercise of parental rights, or parenting? Ray Charles could have seen that these bigoted parents are using their children as pawns to promote hatred and bigotry -- why can't you? As unfortunate as it is, these butt-heads can do this to their children in the privacy of their own homes, but NOT in taxpayer-funded public facilities. If religious rituals such as prayer are not allowed in publicly-funded surroundings, why should racism and other bigoted practices be allowed?

Or in some cases, fortunately.

We are just going to have to agree to disagree on this. I find the hoopla over this speech rather silly - on both sides. A good friend's daughter was forced to sit and listen to Bush who came to speak at her high school and we were both livid that she wasn't given the option to keep her daughter at home and avoid the propaganda. So I can't very well say well now that Obama is president every child absolutely has to listen to him speak.

also support parents being able to pull their children from school on days when evolution, or sex-education, or Black History is being taught?

Why would a Liberal-thinking Democrat deny their child the opportunity to listen to ANY President of our country speak just because they (the parent) did not agree with them? Where is the logic, or fairness in that? How is a child supposed to learn to look at ALL sides of an issue and make correct decisions if they are only exposed to a one-sided view of life?

Since when did a lack of information become preferable to a rounded education? Since when did denial of reality become en vogue? As has been stated elsewhere on this thread, the children will eventually see, or read about, President Obama's speech, as it will become a part of our history. Why deny them the opportunity to see it live, if not out of some misguided sense of protest?

The disruptions at the recent Town Hall meetings (and the associated lies presented there), the display of terrorist-like signage at public gatherings along with firearms, and the hate speech exhibited by the likes of Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and other rednecked bigots, are all indicators of what our children should NOT be exposed to -- if at all possible. Especially, not in publicly-funded venues.

You may find opposition to racism and bigotry "silly," but the vast majority of American Liberals do not. Especially when it has the potential to endanger the life of the President of the United States of America.

I find the controversy incredibly silly.

Can we move along and get back to health care reform now? :hi:

is NOT the topic of this thread! The topic is whether, or not, racism, bigotry, and political motive are acceptable excuses for pulling one's child out of a taxpayer-funded school.

You, as a teacher, are just fine with the concept, while I, and many others, strongly disagree. Yes, we may agree to disagree, but the principal here is about much more than "just one speech" -- it is about the growing racist resentment among rednecks and other social misfits of having elected an African-American as our President.

So please don't dismiss me as you would one of your persistent students. Especially when you have not addressed the questions put to you, but only keep parroting nonsense about a "parental right" to engage in overtly small-minded and racist actions, and to use one's own child as a bigoted, or political, protest sign. That is NOT "parenting," it is virtual child abuse.

If you really believe it is child abuse, turn them in.

I stand by my argument. I honor what parents want. That's what they pay me to do. And no you don't have to agree.

to address the racist motivation that is at the heart of this discussion. Why? Do you not believe that "parents" can be bigots and racists? If they are, do you still support them, and take orders from them without question? Does that not make you at least partially culpable for perpetuating hatred and bigotry?

These are not abstract questions, and being a teacher does not give you license to support anti-social behavior just because it is being exercised by a "parent." That is, unless you actually do support racists and bigots...?

I have explained several times that there are parents who object to this for religious reasons. Long before Obama was elected there have been parents who object to many of the special activities we have in school. And as public servants, we are obliged to respect their wishes. And yes I am sure some parents are objecting to Obama's speech on Tuesday because they hate him and some of them are racists. But to imply I support racists because I am willing to do my job and respect their wishes is way over the top. Way way over the top.

when you keep ignoring the obvious. You may not overtly, or consciously, "support" racism, but your assumption that the "parent" is always right is asinine, and could lead to tacit support for racism. The parents are not your customers -- the students are. Any teacher who does not stand up for their student's rights to an unbiased education, is NOT doing the student any favors.

What is the goal of a federally-funded public education system: well-educated young people, or appeasing a few bigoted parents? If you would take the time to educate yourself about this particular issue, you will find that it has absolutely nothing to do with "religious reasons," and everything to do with rednecked racist and political bigotry.

I am finished debating with you, as I have more than made my points, while you have predictably (and may I say, artfully) danced around them. You may have the last word, and I will take solace in the knowledge that an overwhelming majority of dedicated public school teachers care more about their students' well-rounded education, than they do about rankling a few racist, bigoted, biased, and irresponsible parents' thin-skinned sensibilities.

I agree with you on the Civic Duty angle in that it is part of our civic duty to be informed in our politics so that we can make educated decisions about who to vote for.

I also agree with you that it is abhorrent that, at least in Public schools, parents should have the choice to refuse their children the educational opportunity of listening to the President of the United States speak on an issue that could be one of the most profound changes in the American Social Welfare System ever, and it will certainly have impacts, both positive and negative, for generations to come.

I also agree with you that this is no different than parents getting together and pressuring schools to not teach about evolution, or homosexuality, or sex education, or any other geopolitical world event.

The simple fact of the matter is that this is history in the making. This could be the defining point in American history where America collectively said that the medical welfare of all is a concern of all, or instead that it is every man for himself.

There should not even be a discussion that this event should be taught and discussed in school.

that he will NOT be talking about Healthcare, but his entire subject matter is centered on education. From the first link given in the OP:

"The President will challenge students to work hard, set educational goals, and take responsibility for their learning. He will also call for a shared responsibility and commitment on the part of students, parents and educators to ensure that every child in every school receives the best education possible so they can compete in the global economy for good jobs and live rewarding and productive lives as American citizens."

What else but racism, bigotry, or pure partisan hatred would make an otherwise responsible parent object to the furtherance of their child's education, and encouragement by the POTUS?

How is it wrong in the slightest for the President of the United States of America to address the nation's youth? I am so sick of these treasonous, traitorous bastards.

be a recruiting speech for the Black Panthers.

Kid was serious.

It creates controversy. You can bet there will be at least ONE student who's allowed to hear the President speak. And guess what? You think the kids who were "banned" aren't going to learn what Mr. Obama said?

Au contraire. His words will be the HOT TOPIC of discussion. WAY moreso than if no objections were raised. Forbidden fruit is always the sweetest.

This is from the James Randi forum where I post under the same handle that I use here:

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5072918&postcount=57



See the entire thread: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=5072918&postcount=57

With this suggestion about mine control, they have gone over the edge. Kooks and loonies, each and everyone of them. Oh, and prejudice too. You can not tell me that these going ons with the tea parties and this crap does not have racial undertones.

Disgusting, absolutely disgusting the trash the RW weirdos spew and their gullible followers believe.

Let them opt out. No one should force their children to hear negative things like "stay in school" and "value your education". If they want their kids to be ignorant and mired in the 19th century, it's their right as Americans (unless they live in Texas and no longer call themselves Americans).

and silly...makes it hard to take arguments seriously when they are couched that way...just saying

Just sayin'.

but people can strongly disagree with Obama's plans without being racist...that seems to get lost frequently around here...first reaction of some is to call them 'racists'

to know they're scared of the black guy. There's no rational basis for opposing the President making a speech encouraging students to work hard in school. This vocal opposition, which didn't appear when Bush marketed war (which really is against some of our religions) directly to students. What's the difference? The scary black man. Anyone who's spent more than a week in this culture knows it.


Just sayin'.

Racism. They don't want to admit it, not even to themselves, but this is not about "strongly disagreeing" with President Obama, it's about having a black man as President. PERIOD.

or Carter?

I doubt it

during the bombing.

Clinton spoke on several occasions in Oklahoma City after the bombing. During those years probably few states despised him more. Feelings were running pretty high against him anyway and the bombing could've exacerbated them. But they were respectful and I can't recall anything being dished out to him, to his face.

The PRESIDENT (I thought the right wing, southern Christians and certainly Texans worship that office?!) of the US OF A dammit! is giving a speech on staying in school and laying off the video games. Sounds dangerous. OF course these same Einsteins have no problem following a white Texan good ole' boy faker off to war in a country they have never heard of that never attacked us. Let their kids die in war. But a speech is dangerous.

WAR good. Education bad. My GOD I just summed up the Republican party manifesto.

I mean this is a speech from the President about being a good citizen. WTF

We let them opt out of sex education, classroom parties, etc, etc. Let the little spawn of the reichwing opt out if they so chose. It would be wasted breath on them anyway.

That being said, I know there is a good number of people here who would do the same if it was a republican president.

I don't really get using ones kids as a means of protesting...

I think Bush was the worst President ever, but my kids and I watched every speech we could together. I want them growing up understanding that what these people do affects them every day of their lives, and to value their responsibility to be informed citizens.

I hate seeing people refer the the President as just Obama. It's even rampant in the media. Again, I think it all goes to a lack of respect. Anything that fosters that is the wrong message to be sending to children.

These same opt-out folks would have been screaming 'terrorists!' from the roof tops, and accusing those who wanted to opt-out of "hating 'Murika."

The hypocrisy is astounding. That no one calls them on it is disgusting.

to force students to say the Pledge of Allegiance or to listen to a current politician against their, or their parents', will.

You unpatriotic, nazi, racist, America-hatin' bastard child.

Did I cover enough slurs for both sides of the aisle?

tive jerk as President with screaming titles such as, "ZOMG THE SCHOOL MADE MY KID LISTEN TO <insert GOP douchebag name here>! ZOMG HERE IS THE SCHOOL'S PHONE NUMBER! CALL THEM NOW! ZOMG! ZOMG!"?

No one during the Reagan years ought to have been forced to listen to his addresses either. This isn't a fascist state. And hopefully it never will be.

If anything this is proof of how fragmented the nation has become.

read this book called "Heather has Two Mommies".

effing assholes!!!! and i m not apologizing for calling them assholes either!!!

Will not even sit down and listen the President of the United States of America.


Funny how these fascist pigs suddenly lost their patriotism.

When the President of the United States came to town, people wanted to see him. My, my times have
so changed.

78% red county.

Where is that thread from yesterday that had a wonderful response to a nutter parent?

Left a terse voicemail for him to give me a call at his first oppty tomorrow. The imbecile.

sorry if it offends but its the only answer that makes any sense in this up down country we call America.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJ_Sqj7JUn8

I'm sure we can think of a few appropriate ones.

Right in line with born-in-Kenya, not-a-citizen crap. Treating the democratically elected American President as a prominent person with a meaningful role in American life doesn't work with theocrats and 'sovereign' citizens.

I am sorry.

That`s all I got.

...re-education centers when Obama declares martial law.

All according to plan.

Gotta start'em young.

All we're seeing now is the consequences of those decisions.

media, but also Red State parents it would appear.

Though if things fall far enough even those bonds fall apart.

racists and bigots who teach their children how to hate? What kind of "bonds" are those? These rednecks are overwhelmingly popping up in the Red States.

as important as access to affordable health care, human rights, climate change and war? Not even close. It's stupid and a symptom of all that is wrong with politics today, but it's not the most important issue before us. (P.S. Media ginned controversy is also a symptom of everything that is wrong with politics today.)

In practical terms, I never knew a kid who was not more interested in censored stuff than in anything the school and his or her parents insisted he or she see. I think the kids will see it somewhere, even if they don't see it in school. And if they never see it, the sun will still come up the next day.

What an evil bastard Obama is for stressing the importance of a proper education; OH THE HORROR!!..:sarcasm:

it is the same group that runs all science content through a narrow religious filter such that they won't even acknowledge the age of rocks, or that life has and continues to evolve on the planet. What they are doing in a science classroom is beyond my comprehension.

no wonder America falls almost dead last in education.

with a note going home today regarding the President's talk happens to be a rabid Obama hater. I'm seeing posts here that support this, and I'm not saying that as a teacher I don't agree that parents should have choice in what their kids hear at school. I do smell a rat here, however.

There is, predictably, a fair amount of hysteria in anticipation of this event. My allergist today was asking me, since I am a teacher, what I thought about it and I told her that, truthfully, I hadn't given it much thought. She then went on to say that she would have a stroke if her child watched it at school since, "Obama was going to have the kids say a pledge to him."

If you go to the website the lesson plan materials seem exceedingly innocuous.

All hail Obama. Snicker.

:puke:

and rednecks and so on and so forth...

for black kids to join them in the "boycott." Nah, it's not about race at all, is it.

They said "How can "libs" object to a moment of silence? Nothing insidious here, honest!" I say a speech by Obama wouldn't be any different.