APP - No Lesson Plans, No Quotes, Just A Talk to Students.

Socrtease

Verified User
Firstly, I apologize but I could not remember the title of the thread that brought this up and I was sufficiently perturbed by the subject so I started a new one. Damo or Grind, if you want you can put this as an attachment to the original thread.

So....

On Friday, my step-daughter brought home a permission slip for the Presidential address that is going to happen in schools all over the country. I was a bit concerned because of the things I had read here. I voted for Obama but if his speech was going to include a lesson plan and quotes for the class room I was not sure I wanted her to be present because I don't want any sort of indoctrination, even if it is coming from the guy I voted for. No, check that, ESPECIALLY if it comes from the guy I voted for. So, my wife called her mom and finally they talked today. Her mother is a teacher in Kalama Washington. She teaches 6th and 7th grade english. She wanted to know what her mom knew, as a teacher, about this. Her mother told her that there was NEVER a lesson plan sent, nor were there quotes or anything else. The ONLY thing they were told was that when the speech was over, there would be a class assignment where the kids would write a short blub on what they thought was the most important thing the president said. When I heard this, I called my brother. He and my sister in law are teachers in Hatch, NM, a small farming community that grows the best green chile in the world. He confirmed this for me. No lesson plans, no talking points, no quotes. Nada, just the same thing; kids write what they think was the most important thing the president said. The teachers, both here and in Washington were also told they were to not comment positively or negatively on what was said, and they were not to bring politics into the discussion at all.

What my mother in law said was the most interesting to me. Her school ALSO required kids to sign a permission slip to be able to sit in class and listen to the PRESIDENT OF THE FUCKING UNITED STATES. When Bush spoke, wasn't required. They just turned on the TV and let him speak. So... what I have deduced from all this is that we have allowed the Obama haters, the people that lost and how, to push this to the point that kids have to have PERMISSION to listen to the leader of the free world speak to them. Conservatives have SOOOOO mired this is their own losing politics, that kids can't just come into the class and listen. Good job right wingers. You all should be proud. This is a crowning moment in your whinning and sobbing over your party screwing things up so badly inside their own movement that parents have to approve of their kids listening to the president of the united states. Job well done!
 
I find the entire debate and dialogue concerning this issue beyond silly. Reagan and Bush both indoctrinated the kids into free market greed politics with every appearance on TV. Do parents think their children don't watch TV! I've heard Reagan's kid speech was subtly anti government as every other stupid thing he ever said was, so why wasn't that fool censored - oh yea, he was giving the corporate party line.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/200909030020

The right wing kooks are intent on making America a third world nation of dumb workers, they are succeeding.
 
Last edited:
We don't need a President beaming his face into our classrooms..let him go talk to his Union goons, but leave our kids alone.
 
I gave permission to my high school kid to take a nap during his speech if he feels like it..of course listening to the Hugo Obamas monotone droning on and on probably could put an insomniac to sleep:cof1:
 
Actually what this all brings out to me is the lengths that some will go to to conceal their rascism.
 
Many of us are, esp in red rural areas.
Just becuase we are not members of the KKK and such does not mean we are not rascist.
I admit to having prejudicial views about blacks.
I grew up in a rural area and did not see a live black person till I was about 16 or so.
I work on my issues though.
And no I will not go into details of what my prejudicial views are either.
 
Last edited:
You had the exact same issue I had, the lesson plans originally published on the government's education website changed but were definitely there. I even linked to them. I should have copy/pasted them as they did change.

The problem that I have is if there had been no objections to the indoctrination portion how many classrooms would have participated in them without thought?

Presidents have done this before, but none included the portions that I linked to in that thread that I had problems with. I even mentioned that fact. I don't think it is bad to have Obama talk to kids at school, the parts that I thought were bad had to do with the plans that were included with it on the site. They were wrong.
 
You had the exact same issue I had, the lesson plans originally published on the government's education website changed but were definitely there. I even linked to them. I should have copy/pasted them as they did change.

The problem that I have is if there had been no objections to the indoctrination portion how many classrooms would have participated in them without thought?

Presidents have done this before, but none included the portions that I linked to in that thread that I had problems with. I even mentioned that fact. I don't think it is bad to have Obama talk to kids at school, the parts that I thought were bad had to do with the plans that were included with it on the site. They were wrong.
Like I pointed out on the other thread, the lesson plans on the gov website all said "might" meaning that they might want to do those things. That being the case they MIGHT also not want to do ANYTHING. This faux outrage was started by the AM radio morons and carried on into the public by their ever so enlightened listeners. Morons begat morons and too many otherwise clear thinking people got swept up in the stupidity. As I said above, all this has managed is to turn a presidential address to students, who should do nothing more than watch it with a respect that the position is entitled, into a political ploy in which poor loser repugnicans are going to either keep their children home or not allow them to watch the president. This is a great precident your side has created here. As I said earlier, well done.
 
Like I pointed out on the other thread, the lesson plans on the gov website all said "might" meaning that they might want to do those things. That being the case they MIGHT also not want to do ANYTHING. This faux outrage was started by the AM radio morons and carried on into the public by their ever so enlightened listeners. Morons begat morons and too many otherwise clear thinking people got swept up in the stupidity. As I said above, all this has managed is to turn a presidential address to students, who should do nothing more than watch it with a respect that the position is entitled, into a political ploy in which poor loser repugnicans are going to either keep their children home or not allow them to watch the president. This is a great precident your side has created here. As I said earlier, well done.
And again, how many people would have followed them without thought? Just because your sister would not have does not change that I believe that many would.

I think you are having a hard time not being an apologist for somebody you voted for, what was planned here was not the same thing as a simple speech. Almost all of the things they suggested they "might" do were something you would object to if they "might" have done them during Bush's or Reagan's speeches to kids...
 
You had the exact same issue I had, the lesson plans originally published on the government's education website changed but were definitely there. I even linked to them. I should have copy/pasted them as they did change.

The problem that I have is if there had been no objections to the indoctrination portion how many classrooms would have participated in them without thought?

Presidents have done this before, but none included the portions that I linked to in that thread that I had problems with. I even mentioned that fact. I don't think it is bad to have Obama talk to kids at school, the parts that I thought were bad had to do with the plans that were included with it on the site. They were wrong.


Is there a single lunatic wing-nut bullshit fauxrage shitstorm that you won't defend?

Jesus.

You're a joke.
 
Is there a single lunatic wing-nut bullshit fauxrage shitstorm that you won't defend?

Jesus.

You're a joke.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black, seriously. If Bush had published those lesson plans with suggestions on how to aggrandize Bush in the classroom you would have dropped a load in your pants.

Hypocrisy much?

There appears to be no point where you might stop, look, and say... "Well, yeah... that is a bit too far."...

So long as it was the guy you voted for, it doesn't matter what they do.
 
And again, how many people would have followed them without thought? Just because you sister would not have does not change that I believe that many would.
I concede you are right that many may have, but that does not make this the Young Pioneers, or as many of our enlightened right wing members have said here, Hitler youth. Your side is so fucking bitter about losing that they are willing to have their children be used as pawns to disrespect the president of the united states. This is how politics is, one side wins for a while and then the momentum shifts. But anytime someone with a D behind his name is elected president in this country it signifies the end of the market system in the US. Comparisons to the Young Pioneers and Hitler Youth spill from rightwing mouths like there is ANY comparison to be made. Granted it happens on the left, but as you are one to point out ALL the time, the "they do it too" defense is weak as Budwieser.
 
I concede you are right that many may have, but that does not make this the Young Pioneers, or as many of our enlightened right wing members have said here, Hitler youth. Your side is so fucking bitter about losing that they are willing to have their children be used as pawns to disrespect the president of the united states. This is how politics is, one side wins for a while and then the momentum shifts. But anytime someone with a D behind his name is elected president in this country it signifies the end of the market system in the US. Comparisons to the Young Pioneers and Hitler Youth spill from rightwing mouths like there is ANY comparison to be made. Granted it happens on the left, but as you are one to point out ALL the time, the "they do it too" defense is weak as Budwieser.
Actually I mocked what they were saying about "Young Pioneers" on the radio. I do think that it is wrong to have a self-aggrandizing lesson plan that people "might" use in any classroom, but while there are echoes, it is very different from the Young Pioneers...
 
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black, seriously. If Bush had published those lesson plans with suggestions on how to aggrandize Bush in the classroom you would have dropped a load in your pants.

Hypocrisy much?

There appears to be no point where you might stop, look, and say... "Well, yeah... that is a bit too far."...

So long as it was the guy you voted for, it doesn't matter what they do.


Bullshit. You can project all you like and pretend to know what I would do "if" but we know for sure what you would do when - you'd embrace the knuckleheads and give them a big wet kiss. As I said some time ago, for a guy that likes to pretend he has an independent streak you are a remarkably typical Republican.

The President is speaking to school children. It's a remarkably unremarkable thing for a head of state to do. The idea that giving out optional lesson plans for teachers and providing some activities for student is "a bit too far" is hysterical.
 
Back
Top