So I didn't see a thread on this yet, but if you some how haven't heard of this yet basically schools are supposed to show a speech from Obama which is supposed to promote education and tell kids to set goals and such. Well some conservatives are calling this some sort of indoctrination from what I can tell and its sadly created a controversy.
So for a discussion do you think any of these claims have anything viable about them or are they just pointless? Do you think these claims may have gone too far possibly or not enough(for whatever reason)?
All presidents make mistakes, but until one of them tortures and kills millions of people for disagreeing with them and brings up hostile regimes in foreign countries, lets hold off on the name calling.
hmm the poll on that link was 60% innapropriate 40% appropriate...i doubt i'll have to watch it, since my town is sooo small, and my highschool only has 400 kids in it.
I dont think i need obama getting on television and telling me to stay in school. I can make my own choices, thanks.
You know, children are likely to reflect the political standpoint of their parents. If their parents support Obama, then sure, they'll listen to him when he says get good grades; but that's the teacher's job anyway. If their parents oppose Obama, they will not be inspired to do anything. So forcibly broadcasting this to children who cannot possibly make an informed decision (I'm talking about like 4th grade and under, by the way, not the entire grade spectrum) is completely pointless.
He may not be brainwashing them, as some of the conservatives believe, but if you can honestly tell me that it's not a possibility that his speech will be biased in his favor, then you are too naive to even discuss this issue. Let the teachers inspire the kids, and let the president do his job and not talk about doing it.
Go back to Texas, you ****ing redneck piece of ****. **** your cattle or something.
Stereotype much? How much you want to bet that a comment like "Go back to Africa, you ****ing black piece of ****" would be considered far more outrageous than this? Words are far more valuable than race and location, but I guess you only consider that when someone who agrees with you says something.
I know one moron will make a mistake about this, so no, I don't believe that and I'm not saying it about Obama; it was just an example.
The USA has been around for well over 200 years now, and in that time we've had presidents who were corrupt, lame ducks, ones who overreacted to minor problem,s one's who've put their feet in their mouths on multiple occasions, and ones who are complete and utter idiots. Somehow, we've survived as a nation in spite of incompetent leadership on many occasions in the past, so why is is that one line from our leadership now would cause the fecal matter to hit the rotary object?
Unless you're saying that our founding fathers had no idea what they were doing, and every politician since then has been working to destabilize the government and people of the USA I feel obligated to say that statements like that are either uninformed, or deliberately misleading and intellectually dishonest. Which one is it?
Go back to Texas, you ****ing redneck piece of ****. **** your cattle or something.
I already live in Texas motherfucker :P You fail dumbass XD
How do you figure that?
The USA has been around for well over 200 years now, and in that time we've had presidents who were corrupt, lame ducks, ones who overreacted to minor problem,s one's who've put their feet in their mouths on multiple occasions, and ones who are complete and utter idiots. Somehow, we've survived as a nation in spite of incompetent leadership on many occasions in the past, so why is is that one line from our leadership now would cause the fecal matter to hit the rotary object?
Unless you're saying that our founding fathers had no idea what they were doing, and every politician since then has been working to destabilize the government and people of the USA I feel obligated to say that statements like that are either uninformed, or deliberately misleading and intellectually dishonest. Which one is it?
Simple: None of the idiots of the past directly targeted Americas' youth.
You think a single statement could destroy a world superpower, and you're calling others idiots. Not only that, but you're from Texas.
Harris county, actually. 70% liberal democrat.
And yes, it can. He says something so powerful that it would bring his allies closer together and his enemies more hostile, he could destroy this country. Civil wars have destroyed more than countries, they've even destroyed other countries.
Thats even worse. Thats proof that you're an inbred piece of **** who ****s cattle.
Simple: None of the idiots of the past directly targeted Americas' youth.
Uninformed then. Thank you.
Nearly every president since the advent of public schools has taken at least one address to the public schools. And most similarly and recently George H.W. Bush made an address to all school children in 1991 asking them not to use drugs. This isn't exactly the same as asking them to try in school, but I'm sure like any reasonably intelligent person you can see the striking similarities between the two events.
This isn't new. It's been done before. The media shitstorm has cropped up before too. However, there's nothing wrong with trying to instill in US kids the importance of education, especially when we're falling so far behind the rest of the first world in our primary education system.
Nearly every president since the advent of public schools has taken at least one address to the public schools. And most similarly and recently George H.W. Bush made an address to all school children in 1991 asking them not to use drugs. This isn't exactly the same as asking them to try in school, but I'm sure like any reasonably intelligent person you can see the striking similarities between the two events.
No, I'm not uninformed. That's not a direct targeting, that's saying something that we've been saying for 30 years.
By the way, can someone give me a link to his speech? And what he is going to say? No? I didn't think so.
