Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How does that help the president with what he asked in the speech?
Really? Obama talked about litter and recycling? I missed that part
Maybe we are referring to different speeches, I'm talking about the one given today, didnt see anything in there about helping EACH OTHER, the original lesson plan was HELPING THE PRESIDENT, helping other classmates is not the president..
no, helping mom make dinner is a family obligation, try the religious spin on someone who is religious.. Lets not even discuss the fact that Obama didnt ask children to help a 3rd party, his lesson plan very clearly asked how they can help HIM.
Incorrect, we teach our children that those in power should be questioned, and not disrespect and violate the Constitituion, that the ultimate higher power and right thing to do is above any one individual or political party.
And here we get to the crutch of the information.
First, a child did not ask how they can help, a child in the original lesson plan was asked FOR help.. And I dont want my children to just bend over and accept that what the president says or does is "to protect Americans".. Would liberals have accepted Bush giving a speech to children about how right the Iraqi war was, and about how they can contribute to its success? I would hope not..
I dont know, maybe you should ask him or the Department of Education which acknowledges it was changed..
You guys would have been much better just acknowledging that it was changed, I mean seriously, speeches get changed constantly as the public gets a wiff of what is going to be said, its not like Obama is the first one to change a speech..
PGH, you missed my point. You are saying that the speech must have asked for some suspicious sort of help from children because the Department of Education included in the lesson plan a question of how children might help the President.
But that's not a logical assertion.
There is no need for the speech to have included any appeal for any sort of help. The Department of Education could simply have included that part in the lesson plan because someone in the Department of Education thought it was a good idea.
Once upon a time, asking how you could help the President could be interpreted as asking how you could do something for your country. It's only when people think the President doesn't love this country, doesn't have its best interests at heart, that the question of helping your country suddenly has negative connotations.
The people who work in the Department of Education should probably have thought how people who hate the President would take that question. But most of those people probably think like most Americans, that the person elected as President of the United States loves this country and is working for our best interests. So they didn't see the question as being nefarious or suspicious. They saw it as a way to get students to think about getting more involved in their education, or in their church, or in their community.
And when they started getting all the negative feedback on the lesson plan, they took into consideration the people who hate the President and revised the lesson plan so that it would be more "politically correct" to the people who hate the President.
Logically speaking, that would be the simplest and most obvious explanation for the changes in the lesson plan. The explanation you are devoted to, that Obama hoped to brainwash America's children in an 18-minute speech, that should be the explanation you are shying away from. Because that's the explanation that is not credible.
I dont see where that quote says when the Tea parties began.
Tea parties planning begin in early 2008, race has NOTHING to do with them.. Do you believe everything you read on some liberal blogs
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne
I see the usual personal attacks from you but I dont see a refutation of the article's point.
I dont need to dispute the fact that "racism" is responsible for the tea party protests, especially when you lacked the knowledge that they were planned well before Obamas presidency..
Maybe you need to read the 10th amendment to the Constitution, and come back and comment about race, or maybe you can educate yourself that people are objecting to many of these plans based upon the fact that they are violations of the Constitituion..
Gabmer you would definately lose that bet. You can not reason with folks who do not read or those who just need a reason to justify this type of behavior. Remember the whole Terrorist hoopla during the campaign.
You can reason with people if you don't yell at them and call them names for exercizing their constitutional rights.
In a set of bullet points listed under a heading, "Extension of the Speech," one of the points used to say: "Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president. These would be collected and redistributed at an appropriate later date by the teacher to make students accountable to their goals."
However, that bullet point now reads as follows: "Write letters to themselves about how they can achieve their short‐term and long‐term education goals. These would be collected and redistributed at an appropriate later date by the teacher to make students accountable to their goals."
LOLOLOL that is TERRIFYING!!!!
You really lack the ability to comprehend this dont you? What you call "LOLOLOLOL that is TERRIFYING" is just confirmation that changes were indeed made that were positive.. The fact that many liberals are having difficulties acknowledging that they were changed to become more positive due to (topic thread) "fools" and their protests just validates that they indeed are/were not fools..
Tea parties planning begin in early 2008, race has NOTHING to do with them.. Do you believe everything you read on some liberal blogs
I dont need to dispute the fact that "racism" is responsible for the tea party protests, especially when you lacked the knowledge that they were planned well before Obamas presidency..
Maybe you need to read the 10th amendment to the Constitution, and come back and comment about race, or maybe you can educate yourself that people are objecting to many of these plans based upon the fact that they are violations of the Constitituion..
David Duke's site is liberal, to you?
Gee, for someone who was advising the WH on sloppy editing you seem to have missed something important here: I didnt write the article, pgh, and obviously racists recognize their own; that guy's perception is credible here, andi t's borne out by the signs and comments at the different Palin rallies, etc.
Im not going back there to check but think the "when did the Tea Parties begin" attempt at diversion is something only you are wasting energy on - I dont think the racist article writer talked about it. But even if he had, so what? it's not relevant when they began.
Another thread had a woman breaking down into tears over this speech. I am staggered at the stupidity of these people.
They were going on that he was going to brainwash their children in ONE SPEECH in school?? These same kids are probably taken to movies that have an obvious political undercurrent and the parents are too stupid to see it. These same kids probably saw Happy Feet and the parents missed the WHOLE message about global warming, the melting of the ice caps, the lack of food for the penguins etc.
Don't underestimate most parents just because maybe 10 go overboard. I notice that almost every movie that comes out, but that's just me. My daughter love Wall-E and if that's not full of eco propoganda I don't know what is. I'm one of those odd parents who even talks about the movie afterwards and tells my kid what the underlying message was.
David Duke was indeed a Democrat for quite some time.. but the fact that you sight him as a news story says pleanty about you..
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne
I didnt write the article, pgh, and Im not going back to check but think the "when did the Tea Parties begin" attempt at diversion is something only you're wasting energy on. Your second para - same.
Thats right, you dont question news stories and facts contained in them, you just repeat them and pretend they hold relevant information, even though its been disputed and proven numerous times that the tea parties were planned during the Bush years.. Sure, you can ignore this fact only if you want to try to use "racism" as justification for them, but that doesnt make your ignorance of the facts, reality..
Tell me, have you read the 10th amendment to the constitution yet?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
