Censorship sparks outrage, call to replace school board members

[Liberty Belle]

Read our blow-by-blow description of a conservative school board's special meeting on labor day to ban Obama's speech--and the public outrage that ensued:

http://www.eastcountymagazine.org/?q=node/1860




As a side note, our reporter and her husband have children in this district. Her husband was so appalled by the board's clear bias and censorship that I'm told he's considering a run for the board himself. They kept one of their children home to watch the speech (costing the district ADA money) but sent a second child who didn't want to spoil her perfect attendance record.

There are racial and class overtones here in addition to partisan political ones -- and it's not surprising that the most vocal advocate for airing the speech is a very articulate African-American board member who was out-voted by whites - including one board member who expressed disdain at the idea that her own little darlings, who aren't from broken homes, should have to listen to a speech aimed at inspiring the disadvantaged. This terse exchange between white and black board members exemplifies the total disconnect here:

“I’m thinking about my specific children listening to his speech,” Halgren shared, in a somewhat broken, emotional statement. “Children at seven or eight years old—they had no clue that was going on in the world. I consider myself very fortunate…to have an intact family, we had enough, we had parental support, we had everything we needed to raise our children, children from a very good family. But now you’re putting them in a room where there are words they don’t understand, stories they’re being told are about children that they don’t understand, that they can’t relate to.”

Turner countered, “I don’t think it would be detrimental to our children in this district to sit though a 15-18 minute speech by the President of the United States. A lot of times when they have a lesson in school they don’t always ‘get it.’ That’s why the President’s giving the speech! The fact that some of it might go over their heads is no reason not to show it in the classrooms.”

Full story: http://www.eastcountymagazine.org/?q=node/1860

Note: Our news website (www.eastcountymagazine.org) is really trying to build up an online community, so we'd really appreciate your comments at the bottom of the article. Be sure to click "post" after previewing. Thanks!

[vadawg]

1. all the schools have to do is show the speech and allow opt outs for parents

real simple solution really.

[Liberty Belle]

4. Why must we pander by allowing opt outs from those ignorant

people whose children most need some educatin', not to mention a hefty dose of tolerance?

I personally don't think people should be able to home school kids solely for the purpose of indoctrinating them, as many extremist groups advocate. Kids belong in a public school, or at least a private school where curriculums are monitored, classes are conducted, and overtly racist propoganda can't be shoved down captive audiences' throats.

[vadawg]

7. scuse me, there are a myriad of reasons why parents might not want their kids to watch

yes some are just batshit crazy, but others are for religious and cultural reasons, my kids opted out of watching the speech and there were no problems from the school for us or the other families who withdrew there kids. It should be the parents decision whether you like it or not..

[defendandprotect]

11. What were the reasons your kids withdrew from watching?

[vadawg]

12. myself and my wife decided to withdraw them for the day, as did lots of others

and believe it or not most were not for political partisan reasons.

[parasim]

13. But that didn't answer the question.

So then, what was your reason?

[vadawg]

16. i think i explained it pretty well, myself and my wife made the decision to withdraw our kids

that should be a good enough reason without any further explanation, it should be the parents choice even if you dont agree with that choice...

[proud2BlibKansan]

22. Why?

You don't want the president to tell them to work hard and do well in school? :crazy:

[vadawg]

25. you and me kansas always disagree on everything, but as a teacher

im sure you have come across families who dont mix politics and education for a lot of reasons, anyway i told my kids to work hard,and to finish their brekkies :)

[tblue37]

36. But what was political in Obama's speech? He was just encouraging them

to study hard and get a good education. That's not political.

[vadawg]

39. okay, but hes still a politician and for some people it really is render unto caesar

i dont get why people are so against parents who have a minority viewpoint from being able to express that viewpoint. Do we have to give over all control of our kids to some state appointed guardian because we have beliefs that the majority dont go along with, because that seems to be what a lot of people are advocating here...

[girl gone mad]

63. Then you are making a decision based on politics.

You are choosing to shelter your child from a few words of encouragement given by the democratically elected leader of their country.

I wonder what other educational opportunities you think parents should be allowed to opt their children out of. How about Lincoln's Gettysburg address or JFK's inaugural address - should these also be optional? Because it seems a bit authoritarian to me. I trust that my child is smart enough to think for himself and make up his own mind regarding a speech from the President. I wouldn't have even choose to take him out of a pro-war speech given by Bush because I know that my child is quite capable of filtering information and coming to a logical conclusion. These values were instilled in him at a very early age.

[vadawg]

73. and i respect your choices as a parent, but we differ on the political thing

i would never dream of denying you the right to have your child listen to a politician speak, i just ask the same courtesy of you. As to the speech of lincoln or jfk, believe it or not thats history and looked apon differently same as when my eldest was exposed to adolf hitler and the greek classics..

[girl gone mad]

78. What do you think is the difference?

These historical speeches were very political and many of the themes are still relevant to today's politics. Obama gave a talk that was apolitical in its message. I think your position is poorly thought through. You are making a decision based on your emotional reaction to the President. You aren't doing your kids any favors in life. They'll have to grow up and face the real world some day.

[vadawg]

82. i think you are missing the point, its not an emotional thing

its very deeply cultural, theres a big difference between having a politician, the pope, a rock star etc talking to your class than having a historical figure giving a speech etc. as another poster pointed out he wouldnt want the holy father to give a message to their kids no matter what the message, for us politicians are a no no, whereas i would see the pope differently.

[girl gone mad]

89. There is a church/state separation..

so listening to the pope speak might violate that separation, but he could speak to a private school. We had a rock star speak at my high school and nobody complained.

We're atheists, but I've always tried to expose my child to various religions and I wouldn't mind if he heard from the pope. In a comparative religion class at public school, a speech from the pope would be highly appropriate.

You live in America, so I think having the leader of America give a pep talk is appropriate and I still think pulling your children out of the class is an act of extreme paranoia, not good parenting.

[vadawg]

91. we are never going to agree, but at least i thank you for not being abusive

:)

[merwin]

96. And in America, we respect people's right to choose how their kids get educated.

I think you hit the nail right on the head.

"In a comparitive religion class at public school, a speech from the Pope would be highly appropriate."

I'm sure a lot of athiests believe that the Pope, even at a non-religious private school where the separation of church and state does not apply, should not address the student body directly for any reason, and would similarly not want their children to attend such a speech. I'm not speaking specifically about you, just about athiests in general. I know plenty of athiests (and even a few former Catholics) who want the Pope to stay as far away from their kids as possible, regardless of the message that he is giving... even if it were "Stay in school and work hard".

You're making the distinction between public and private here. This has nothing to do with public or private, or even comparitive religion class. This has to do with someone's personal beliefs, either religious or cultural. That being said, why is it not OK for someone to have the opinion that a "the leader of America giving a pep talk" isn't appropriate in school? It's not the pep talk that is the problem here, it's the "Leader of America" part. Some people don't want the "Leader of America" speaking directly to schools at all, regardless of the context. It's as solid of a line as the separation of church and state, and it's completely valid. It doesn't mean you don't agree with the words that are being spoken. Not attending it also did not lessen the school experience, as many children for several decades have grown up quite nicely with these pep talks given by their parents.

It's simply a cultural and/or religious difference, where certain boundaries are applied to things like education, like how some religions are against the Pledge of Allegiance. It's nothing against Obama himself, and is not due to anything that Obama said.

The "You live in America" part is just sad in my opinion. That is just begging for someone to point out that it's the same rational that the whackjobs on the right give as to why English should be the national language and everyone should either speak it or leave.

[defendandprotect]

150. Interesting post . . .

and it caused me to see other facets of this particular event --

We certainly wouldn't want to see any comment or opinion by politicians in our school
newspapers, would we? On the other hand, if it were strongly anti-military and anti-
war, then I might like even a Pope like Pope John XXIII of long ago to give that one!

Should there ever be a Pope again who spoke for democracy/equality, peace, human rights,
humanity, compassion -- though I am strongly anti-organized patriarchal religion --
I might say, "Bring it on!"

I do think you make an excellent point as well about who is presented as a "leader" to
children. Today's message is not necessarily the message they will hear tomorrow from
this same individual.

We all recognize that at some point in life we have given our trust to someone who later
disappointed us.

Overall, I do think that this was probably a very special day for children of color to
have someone other than a "white male" acknowledged as a leader.

[Hansel]

161. I would have no problem with the Pope giving an address

to my children if it was something that he knew a great deal about and it wasn't about religion. If the Pope has something to teach the children that will be of benefit to them and isn't religious in nature, what difference does it make? I'm an agnostic and I could care less as long as he doesn't cross the line.

Just because Obama is speaking to the kids doesn't mean he's being political. He has a unique experience to share with the students that could be beneficial to some.

Some teachers also are political or religious, but most are capable of teaching school without bringing either into the classroom. I'm sure that both the Pope and Obama are just as capable of doing that as teachers are.

There is just a little too much hyper-sensitivity over this whole issue.

[defendandprotect]

145. Your example . . .

of the Pope talking to a class is, of course, out of bounds given separation of church
& state -- but, happily, it would suggest to me that on the other side of this issue,
you'd be very willing to fight against intrusions by church into state issues . . .
especially re public schools.

And, perhaps, also strongly object to having the military speak to classes --
or even be present in public schools -- which I find highly objectionable.

Fortunately, at the time my son was in school this wasn't permitted, but we realized
later that frequently he had been contacted by military recruiters by telephone !!

When we did become aware of it, it was still difficult even with parent intervention
to put a stop to it. I think at some point we had to threaten to call the police!!??


PS: But re "it's not emotional" . . . in fact, don't parents when they make these kinds of
decisions also have to consider what might be an emotional impact on your child having been
separated from the class -- separated from a memorable shared experience?

[me b zola]

156. How does your children study current events, history, or social studies?

All people have a political framework from which they operate, even teachers, the writers of text books, and those who develop the curriculum. Do you limit your children's public education to only reading, writing, and arithmetic?

[SemperEadem]

166. So, you always routinely pulled your children out of school

for the last 8 years?

[merwin]

75. Um, wanting the lack of politics in school is the opposite of authoritarian.

I think I can safely assume that he would have done the same thing for either of those, and possibly watched them together as a family at a later time. Besides, you're comparing apples and oranges. Those speeches have historical significance. A speech by Obama saying "stay in school" carries zero historical significance.

Kudos to you for instilling those beliefs in your children. But this is solely a differing style of parenting than yours. You may not agree with it, but it doesn't make it any less valid. He's not doing this because he thinks Obama is evil. It's a parenting decision that applies to all political events of any kind during school hours. Nothing wrong with that, just as there is nothing wrong with not wanting the Pope to give a "stay in school" speech to your kids.

People are allowed to make decisions like this for their children, and I have no issue as long as it is fairly applied and not based on something such as racism or ass-hattedness (ie: those that did it because Glenn Beck told them to).

[girl gone mad]

83. So you don't want children to be exposed to any political ideas..

in school?

:wtf:

I'm really stunned and amazed that there are parents who don't want their children to enter life armed with the knowledge and information to make reasonable decisions for themselves.

I think that keeping your child from being able to hear a benign message delivered exclusively to students by the democratically elected President of the United States is the ultimate in authoritarian behavior on the part of parents. It's an act of extreme authoritarianism to tell your child that you do not want him or her to listen to an apolitical message of inspiration from the President. This man has his finger on the button, has the power to take us to war and can veto any legislation, but you think his message to children is insignificant. Odd, to say the least. Almost like you want to pretend that he doesn't exist.

[merwin]

97. He has already said otherwise.

Historical politics and civics is one thing... a direct message from the President is another. You don't think that might go against some religious/cultural beliefs?

[Raineyb]

197. No I don't think it goes against any religious/cultural beliefs

It sure as hell goes against beliefs of racial superiority though. Some people fear that their children might see black people as someone to respect rather than merely tolerate.

They pulled their children out of school so they won't see the president speak.

[Hannah Bell]

207. i believe his reasoning is: he doesn't want the president to be "advising" his children

at all, no matter how good the advice.

there's no knowledge or information in the speech ("stay in school, study, etc.") the kids can't get from their teachers or parents. the only novelty is it's the president saying it.

some people don't want their kids to view the president or other politicians as sanctioned authority figures whose advice should be listened to.

the act (politicians addressing & guiding "the youth") has some bad precedents. it makes me uncomfortable on a national level.

[seabeyond]

111. i do not get the parent that teaches child to put hands over ears in an educational, academic

environment. it makes absolutely no sense to me. it tells me that parent has so little faith in their child to reason, think. and that is the saddest aprt of this whole thing.

i NEVER deny my children the opportunity to differing views. never.

keep politics out of school?

how absurd can one be.

dont teach history, .... along with science for those that are so very afraid

[noiretextatique]

188. as the first african american president, everything obama does

is historically significant. people who shelter their kids from the world need to take a look at their own fears. my family's fear about the world could have held me back, but i recognized it as fear and i was damned if their fear, not mine, would stop me from doing or thinking or seeing anything.

[merwin]

227. That would be racial overcompensation.

Sure, his election was historicaly significant... and occasionally there's a speech that he'll give that is tied to his race that might be historically significant due to his being African American... but EVERYTHING he does? He takes a dump and it's historically significant?

By this logic, everything George W Bush did was historically significant because he was the first President to be selected by the Supreme Court. Or maybe because he was the first son of a President to become President.

Being black does not make the speeches that Obama gives any more significant than any other Presidential speech. The significance of them comes from the content of his message, and the only historical significance this one is going to have is how insane it made the right wing.

I love the guy, and there's far more to him than his skin color.

[janx]

94. "...give over all control of our kids to some State appointed guardian"

He's the president of the United States. Presidents do things like this and always have! I don't know about you, but when I was growing up, we saw presidential speeches in school--and at home, whether or not our parents had voted for that president.

We lived in a democratic republic and respected the office of president, because we respected our Constitution and method of government. We respected our fellow citizens, our neighbors, and our colleagues, whether or not we agreed with them politically.

What sort of minority viewpoint do you have? And do you really think it's worth it to value your narrow political beliefs at the expense of your children's education? Should you shield them from civics lessons because of one election? :shrug:

[vadawg]

95. i guess the point is being lost, civics is fine, so is historical politics etc

its just having politics of the day so to speak and the inevitable spin either way being given in school sits badly. It dosent matter who the pol is, as i explained in a way its render unto caesar, and all i am asking for is that people remember that there are many families that dont mix politics of the day and school for a myriad of reasons and we should have the option of opt outs. I am not looking to infringe apon your kids education, they dont need to learn my culture, but at least let us keep our culture..

[foo_bar]

122. "but at least let us keep our culture"

as i explained in a way its render unto caesar

The Biblical passage you cite seems to repudiate your stance on the secular and divine ("my culture"); "render unto Caesar" in the context of this legal/theological debate meant ceding taxation and secular authority to the "bad guys" (e.g., the gubmint) and letting God keep the rest, while leaving those precise boundaries intentionally vague (since teh Christ wasn't a policy wonk like God (per Lot, Abraham, Noah, Moses et al.) and specifics would have come back to haunt him later, so his cryptic response indicates he might have been the Obama of his day).

[goclark]

141. Do your children ever watch television if you are not in the room?

Most kids do and I'm sure they have seen politicians express extreme views.


Interesting.

[Jazzgirl]

142. Wow....your reason for pulling your children out of school

sounds pretty close to the reason pukes gave. His speech wasn't political. How many times did you pull your kids out of school when *shrub did a speech?

[defendandprotect]

144. We're just trying to understand your viewpoint . . .

Did something about this frighten you?

To tell you the truth, there are beautiful pics of kids watching Obama --
but that screen-thingy and people sitting in front of it has that Orwell 1984 overtone . . .
at least for me.

On the other hand, TV is like any other tool -- whether a typewriter or government --
it can be used for good or evil.

I think most of us get minority rights -- but like school prayer, or the "under god"
options in the pledge -- these things can sometimes make it more difficult when
minorities are forced to leave the scene or opt out in some public way . . . can't it?

[liberalhistorian]

149. Look, I agree in general with what you're saying. But the problem

I have with that is that many such parents then demand that MY kid and everyone else's kid go along with what they want simply because it's what THEY want. You wanna make such decisions for YOUR children, fine, go for it. But don't drag everyone else's into it as well. I'm not saying that's what you and your wife do, I'm just saying that that's what too many other parents do and THAT is what gets my back up. Not that they do it but that they demand everyone else do the same as well.

[defendandprotect]

152. I think we have a way to go before we understand all sides here . . .

and I completely AGREE with what you're saying here --
After all, some schools did actually close!!

But, I can assure you that if W Bush had ever wanted to speak to my children
in a class setting, I would have pulled them!!!
NO MATTER WHAT THE MESSAGE WAS!!


:)

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

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

[tblue37]

44. kthxbai.

[proud2BlibKansan]

104. How is this mixing politics?

Telling kids to work hard isn't political. You told your kids to work hard so you obviously have no problem with that.

If Obama was running for office (like Bush was in 2004 when he appeared at high schools across the country) then this would be political. But Obama is the president.

If you are so anti political, why do you post on a political discussion board?

[vadawg]

106. this is political, hes a politician whether you like it or not, president or not

[proud2BlibKansan]

107. No, he is the leader of the country and his speech wasn't the least bit political.

And if you are so averse to politics, why are you posting on a political discussion board?

We had parents object to their kids listening to Obama for religious reasons and they also objected to having their kids watch the inauguration. But they don't participate in the political process at all. So your refusal to let your kids watch the president while you are an active member of an online political community doesn't make any sense.

[vadawg]

108. i am averse to politicians, not to what is happening in the world

theres a big difference, to you the speech was non political, to me and my wife it was, opinions differ as im sure your aware due to the variety of beliefs that the kids you teach show..

[proud2BlibKansan]

109. Okay what did he say that was political?

Stay in school?

Work hard?

Wash your hands?

I am really trying to understand your motives here. I watched the speech and would call it motivational, not political. So I am interested in what you heard in that speech that was political.

[Solomon]

118. You know damn well what his/her motives are.

Can't be hidden behind ridiculous reasons. Stupid is as stupid does.

[me b zola]

158. Now I'm wondering

if that poster flies a confederate flag from their Virgina home.

:shrug:

[SemperEadem]

169. for real... you see it plainly, too, I see.

well put.

[noiretextatique]

189. it cerrtainly seems that way

there was nothing remotely political about his speech. things that make you go hmmmm....

[Raineyb]

205. His motives are as plain as the nose on one's face.

Although I see there are those who continue to allow themselves to be fooled.

[seabeyond]

112. no, it wasnt. you can keep saying it. but it wasnt. the political is people like you

and the right that made it political. otherwise

no

it was not political. you made it so

[dionysus]

134. guess he's with the teabaggers on this one.

:shrug:

[seabeyond]

138. that he gets to be. but to feed a lie.... no. it gets called. nt

[defendandprotect]

155. Unfortunately . . .

Obama already has an historical connection now to supporting wars --
as sad as that is, we have to face it.

But every parent has to decide for themselves on what the whole "leader" package
tells their child.

I do know this -- if I had kids in school and W was still President, I would have
removed my children from the class.

In fact, I would have probably strongly criticized the school for permitting a
warmongering/torturer to speak to children!



:evilgrin:

[seabeyond]

173. furstly... no, the speech was not political and no one can make it so.... secondly

i have never "shielded" children from differing views. regardless. i have never stopped my children from listening to republicans or listening to bush for that matter. they often listened to what bush had to say. the HAD to listen to what bush said so they could recognize the lies and wrongs that were told the nation. so when THEY addressed this issue at school, with teachers and other students THEY knew what they were talking about, not parroting what i said.

i dont get this refusing information from children for fear???? of what?

[defendandprotect]

178. The speech wasn't "political" . . .

but Obama is a politician with a history now --

I'm supporting both sides here if you read my posts --

and, of course, while the individual we're addressing wants to

bring his private/personal decisions out into this public arena . . .

at the same time they want to be very VAGUE.

So -- we're all kinda arguing with thin air -- and many are presuming what

his reasons are, but we don't really know.

I wouldn't listen to what Bush had to say -- it was disgusting.

And, it depends on the age of the child as to how much they can understand

about all of the issues from war to wiretapping to the human right to health care.

If Obama were speaking to my children today -- despite my many disagreements with him -

I would not have pulled my kids from school.

[seabeyond]

185. firstly.... hey. dontcha hate when you have type, especially in title for all to see

lol

as stupid as furstly

lol

and past edit time.

i know why people do this. and it is continually getting worse. i dont like it. i dont think it is healthy and i think it is creating the ability for fox and repugs to lie so and get away with it, .... because as a society we have set ourselves up for this

i get it

i dont like it

thanks for the post

[defendandprotect]

186. Fox has to become irrelevant -- all MSM has to -- and why are you watching it ??????

[seabeyond]

187. an assumption. i dont watch fox. doesnt mean i dont know what is going on with them

i really dont watch any tv at all, except stewart and colbert.... all tv is crap. news is the crappiest. still doesnt mean i dont know what is happening.

[defendandprotect]

193. I'm with you . . .

[defendandprotect]

154. As we go further along in discussing this . . .

it becomes more and more obvious that when it's a "leader" it's not just what

that leader is saying at the moment ---

To see this person as a "leader" is to take the whole thing . . . everything

that leader has stood for.

When it comes to subsidizing religious organizations -- wars which he hasn't

stopped -- failure to move strongly towards the human right to health care for all --

it does become kind of a package.

Children are not going to necessarily have this full awareness -- but I would think

many of them know he is also Commander in Chief and has a lot to do with war and

causing harm to people in other nations?

[Cha]

162. No, it isn't political and you

know that but you have nothing so you continue to say that.

Why are you here when you obviously hate everything Obama? To distract? Fuck that.

[defendandprotect]

153. I agree with you . . .

but, then I also quite well know that if I had children in school and

Pres. W Bush had wanted to speak to them about anything, I would have pulled them!

How about you?

[proud2BlibKansan]

184. Yes I wouldn't have wanted them to hear Bush but not for political reasons

Dubya is inarticulate. Their time would have been better spent reading a book in the library.

[Hannah Bell]

208. but he was the PRESIDENT!!! what's sauce for the goose, etc.

[GOTV]

113. Do you send your kids to a public school? Run by politicians?

[madokie]

114. But what was the reason you kept them out of school???

'fraidy cat :-)

[proud2BlibKansan]

183. I figured it out!

[AnotherMother4Peace]

202. It should be considered an unexcused absence - no politics, educational, beneficial n/t

[la la]

29. but.....

why did you opt out?

i guess i missed the explanation.....

was there an explanation?

you post here with a comment like that---you need to explain----but maybe, that's just me.....

[Liberty Belle]

30. Sorry, you have NOT stated your reason.

That's a typical pattern of racists. If your reason wasn't due to racism, then you shouldn't be hesitant to state it here.

[newtothegame]

33. Haha wow, quiet desperation. Find some happiness in life. N/t

[vadawg]

34. so what your saying is the only reason that someone would stop there kids from going to see a pol

politician is racism, does that count if you also withdraw if the pol is white, or asian. Cause if not then you are talking through your ass...

[Jim Sagle]

140. You could end this Seinfeld controversy by telling us the reason.

Of course it's your right not to do do, but this IS a political board - a very appropriate place to do so.

Coming to a political website and declaring your right not to give reasons for the political desisions you make is kinda STOOOOOPID, ain't it?

[Raineyb]

130. There's not going to be an explanation because it was racism.

And it's so obvious Stevie Wonder can see it.

[Hannah Bell]

168. The charge of "racism" in response to every criticism of the president

is beginning to sound like political manipulation.

I wouldn't like it if Bush did it. I don't like it when Obama does it.

When you charge racism for everything, it's like the boy who cried wolf.

The word loses its meaning & offense.

Maybe that's your goal, I don't know.

[SemperEadem]

174. however, the charge sticks here

dude's problem is this: he don't want no n____r talking to his kid about anything. He just doesn't have the stones to stand in his truth and take his asswhippin' for it here.

Now if you want to be naive and keep your pollyanna-ish outlook on people's characters, then go right on ahead. It just makes you look delusional when the obvious is in front of you but you can't bend your mind to consider it.

[Hannah Bell]

182. i'm not sure how you've determined this. perhaps you'll give your evidence.

[Raineyb]

194. I'm calling it because that's what I see.

Presidents have addressed children in school before and there was no big outcry about needing to opt out. So why in this case? I can think of ONE thing that's different about this president than all the others before. Now maybe you are under the delusion that racism is a thing of the past because a black man has managed to get himself elected president of this still racist country but I can ill afford to delude myself in such a manner.

That people on this board may be uncomfortable with the charge is not my concern. That you refuse to see it matters to me not one whit. That someone on a so called Democratic board admits that he kept his kids out of school to have them avoid seeing the black president speak and have the nerve to claim it's not racism is an insult to my intelligence. I know that people don't want to see the racism involved in the opposition to Obama. Too bad, I will rub you nose in it until you recognize it. I have to live with it every day why the hell shouldn't you?

The boy who cried wolf? The deadly consequences of racism in this country are too fucking serious to relegate to a mere game or a stupid fable. But then you don't have to live in a black skin in a racist country do you? I will not hold back in order to make you comfortable. Don't like it? Too bad! I don't like being a second class citizen in the country in which I was born. I have to deal with it. You'll just have to suffer or put your head in the sand. Either way I will call racism every time I see it. I don't need your permission nor do I need your approval.

[Hannah Bell]

206. I don't remember any previous occasion on which a president made a national-level

speech addressed specifically to K-12 schoolchildren.

i recall numerous occasions when presidents visited local classrooms or schools, but no national-level speech. i believe it's a first; if you have evidence otherwise, show me.

it's because it's national-level that you're hearing a "big outcry" about parents pulling their kids.

but parents pull their kids out of all kinds of school events at the local level, including speeches & visits by politicians.

knowing that, i wouldn't invite the reaction, & the politization of classrooms, by making a national level speech targeted to schoolchildren, nor to do a lesson plan where they're asked how they might "help" the president, as was reportedly the original plan.

i don't need your permission or approval for my opinions or beliefs, either, call me "racist" as you please.

you might ask the poster to pm you his own background; his action might make more sense to you.

[Raineyb]

220. Of course you don't need my permission. Just like you didn't need my

permission to dismiss what I see because you refuse to see it. I am sick and tired of racism only being called racism on the few (or blatantly obvious examples of it) when white people manage to recognize it. Until you stop acting as though it's only racism when YOU see it we won't agree on much when it comes to racism. I am sick and tired of white people telling me what the hell it is I see. I just told you what the hell I saw who the fuck are you to tell me otherwise?

[Hannah Bell]

226. To disagree isn't to dismiss. I have a different opinion from you. I'm not you,

the world doesn't consist only of you, your experiences, your knowledge, or your POV. You have your opinion, I have mine, this is a political discussion board.

[Control-Z]

201. I've come to the conclusion

that if it isn't racism, it is that his children are daughters, and his culture/religion doesn't allow the education and advancement of 2nd class/women/chattel. Must be hard trying to maintain that minority culture in America.

If it isn't one of the two, I'm plumb out of ideas.

[mamaleah]

212. Does his reason matter? Really?

Even if he gave a reason, he'd still get piled on.

JWs certainly would have opted their kids out. They aren't racist. They don't even vote. I guess that makes them.....politico-phobes. Stone them!

I will bet money this guy opted his kids out for religious reasons. But that would just give more fuel to the fire, so why would he mention it?

I saw the speech. It was beautiful and I do not understand why anyone would opt their kids out, but it is their right as a parent to do so. And shockingly.....it's not always about racism. If it were, I guess anyone on these forums who ever disagrees with or dislikes a policy of the President is a racist.

[Raineyb]

221. If you're not interested in even pretending to have respect for some of our views

why the fuck do you bother answering?

I'm tired of white people telling me what the hell I see.

When was there an outcry like this about a white president addressing children? That's right there wasn't! It's obvious that there are plenty of people who don't mind black people being senators, or representatives, or the occasional mayor but to be president and run the whole country? No that upsets the natural order of things. Having their children look up to this man may actually make them think that black people are worthy of respect rather than being tolerated while continuing to believe themselves superior even to the point where when a black person tells them what they see they insist on telling the black person what it is they actually saw.

People are supposed to be able to friggin' read which is supposed to mean they can infer. Apparently my inferences makes you so uncomfortable that you insist on "correcting" me. I know what I'm seeing. I don't need you to tell me what I saw. So stop telling me what I'm seeing. I'm TELLING you what the hell it is I'm seeing.

Is that too much fucking respect to expect around here?

[panzerfaust]

120. actually, you did not

First you asserted: "my kids opted out of watching the speech"
Next you stated: "myself and my wife made the decision to withdraw our kids"

Two very different circumstances.

Further, your having volunteered the information that you prohibited your children from participating, it seems unduly defensive to simply snap back "that should be a good enough reason" in response to inquiry as to what those reasons were.

You raised the issue.

---------------
Oh, {warning, grammar police} it should, in American English, be "my wife and I..." Even in British English such use as you make of the first person singular reflexive pronoun is considered awkward at best.

[Name removed]

124. Deleted message

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

[Maru Kitteh]

26. I have a question. Why are you, without fail, on the Freeper side of every single issue?

And your statement is positively absurd on it's face. Evidence and facts mock you.

[HughBeaumont]

116. Noticed that as well. And a few others as of late.

Lots of "let's play 'Devil's Advocate's", "aren't we being just like freepers by doing . . .", "It's no different than when Bush was in office . . " Funny how that works.

[Spazito]

135. Good question! n/t

[Jazzgirl]

143. I have noticed the same thing Kitteh.

n/t

[dionysus]

132. hmm, you withdrew your kids like these teabaggers did, but not for political reasons?

hookay.

[Horse with no Name]

18. He laid it out the other day

He doesn't trust the President.
It's archived here somewhere. Don't let him tell you otherwise.

[vadawg]

19. i think the quote is i dont trust politicians, whether they are the president, prime minister

senator, congressman, MP or councilman or whatever, and i dont think i have ever hidden that. Politicians are not some magical creatures that we should bow before and give our complete confidence as you should know if you see the corruption that seems to surround the political classes...

[proud2BlibKansan]

23. What is magical about telling kids to work hard?

For the record, I think your decision to keep your kids home is crazy. And not in their best interests.

[vadawg]

28. yep i have no problem with you having an opinion onour decision

but it should be our decision as parents as im sure you would agree....

[merwin]

50. Fact is, many people here would have gone through with a boycott if GW Bush had decided to speak

on the first day of school instead of Obama. DU'ers say that a message from the President to stay in school should be respected, but if it came from W then I think it would have caused an uproar here.

Politicians are politicians, and I agree... there is no reason that you should respect the President solely because he is the President. I personally like Obama's message because he is speaking from his own life experiences, and therefore it carries some relavence. But I am also not going to tell people that they should sit through it because they should respect the President. Fact is, I don't respect George W Bush, and I never will. I didn't voluntarily sit through his speeches when he was President, and I won't ever (unless I really feel like getting myself riled up).

People should make decisions about things like opting out of a school activity based on their indiviudal views, and 9 times out of 10 they're completely valid. In this case, a few nutjobs got together and created a fake outrage that never would have existed otherwise. It's sad that they pulled the wool over so many people's eyes... it's equally sad that people let them.

That being said, the fact that some nutjobs pulled their kids out of school because they think Obama is a communist should not invalidate those who have their own rational reasons for doing so, such as yourself. Kudos to you for sticking to your beliefs and not selectively applying them based on the party that the politician belongs to.

I'm sure you did a great job of passing along the message that Obama was tryin to put forth, and I think that it was probably as well received from you as it would have been from him... maybe even more. If more parents would have discussions with their kids one on one about the significance of working hard and doing your best (as opposed to simply punishing them when they do poorly), I think there would be a far greater impact than watching the President share his experiences.

[vadawg]

52. thanks for the rational reply instead of all the accusations

i think you understand what i am trying to say, if it hadnt of been for all the hullabaloo by the nutjobs, many families would have just done what they always do and no one would have been broad brush painting.

[merwin]

60. I felt a bit of rational response was called for after reading through this.

You're getting hammered on out here :) Honestly, you shouldn't have to provide a reason for choosing not to participate in it... just like you shouldn't have to provide a reason for choosing not to participate in the Pledge of Allegiance.

However, I still reserve the right to make fun of the whackjobs on the right who are calling Obama a communist and sayinng that he's trying to create a US version of the Hitler Youth... because that's just downright funny.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

133. Having a DUer admit --

that they kept their children from watching the Democratic President's speech on education is shocking, to say the least.

To hedge with bullshit answers about why they were kept away is insulting.

This is a partisan, progressive message board, lest certain posters forget.

[merwin]

171. It's not the message that was being opposed.

It's the method of delivery. Some people just have a general distrust of politicians, democrat or republican and regardless of the message that's delivered want to keep a message from politicians separate from their children's education.

While I personally don't have a problem with my children watching it, I am saying that there shouldn't be any problem with a parent who wants to keep do this as long as it's applied equally to all politicians and the decision is not based on the political ideology of the person speaking, racism, or because Glenn Beck told you to do it... which is the case with the Republican outrage.

Fact is, there is a POTENTIAL for abuse, and whether or not it is currently being abused does not matter to some people. If you have cultural reasons, ie: you come from a communist country where this kind of thing IS abused, it is your right as an American to keep those separate if you are not comfortable as a parent with that level of political integration with education. I would only see it as a problem if it were based on one of the reasons I listed above (racism, etc).

Just like I respect people's decision on whether or not to participate in school activities (Pledge of Allegiance, etc) based on religious or cultural reasons, I also will respect people's decisions on this.

I'm still going to laugh at Republicans who do it because Glenn Beck scared them.

[Raineyb]

195. Bullshit

The only thing that's a problem is that his children may have to see a black man as someone to look up to rather than someone who is merely tolerated while still harboring the notion that they are actually superior to this person they are tolerating. The rationalizations are really rather thinly veiled and the push back that's going on is people not buying it.

[TheKentuckian]

98. Bullshit! Seven or eight months into his first vacation there may have been eye rolling

but I find it highly dubious that any beyond the fringe of the fringe (if they would make a stink either but for the sake of argument) would be boycotting W's message to school kids (if he had ever bothered) prior to 9/11.

Nice job on stretching to make a point using the prism of hindsight rather than attempting to see it from a more similar vantage point. Reagan gave a damn stump speech and I certainly wasn't brainwashed and I sparked a doobie when Poppy was done droning on.

I would say if your kid can be brainwashed in a half hour, regardless of content, then you have completely failed as a parent and have produced dolts that will worsen society. There is no rational reason for the reaction here, like there is no rational reason for Sex Ed permission slips. Kids MUST be prepared to deal with reality rather than treated like hot house flowers. If you have a kid that can't process a message from anyone, agree or disagree, and think it out then you are a crappy or at best an ineffective parent.

[Solomon]

119. Thank you. I hate it when they present false arguments,

if it were Bush...

See right through that bullshit.

[defendandprotect]

159. Well, the fascist tactics to steal 2000, the fascist rally to stop the vote counting,

the fascist play to the Supremes would have been enough for me, I think --

I would have still wondered -- depending on the age of the child -- if it was

worthwhile to separate them from their class.

But, certainly, by the time W was a warmonger/torturer, I would never have

permitted my kids to watch any speech by him!!

Unless W was giving a full confession of all his crimes--!!!

:evilgrin:

[SemperEadem]

177. well said! Thank you!

[seabeyond]

115. you cant give it to the left. you dont know. didnt happen. cant say this is cool cause left

would have done it.

left didnt do it with reagan.
left didnt do it with bush 1
left didnt do it with letters kids had to write to bush 2 support troops

[Uzybone]

137. I disagree. Most people here wouldn't have given a damn

its normal for bigoted people to say that if things were turned around that the same thing would happen but it just is not true.

[defendandprotect]

157. Absolutely, which I've been pointing out . . .

Why would I permit a warmongering/torturer to speak to my kids!?

So the "leader" comes with a pre-set package . . .
and unfortunately, Obama has been supporting these wars at this point.

I'm not saying that's the poster's reason, but it's something I think about now.

So -- this is one subject where I'm a fence sitter -- I support both sides!

And, some may have thought Obama was a "commie" or they don't like his skin color --
lots of that seems to be going around.

But, this poster isn't making clear the WHY of their decision -- and unless he/she
does, we don't know.

I have said elsewhere -- and happily so -- that it was probably a wonderful event,
especially for minority school children who were finally see a world leader who was
other than "white" --!!



:)

[stuball111]

61. So, what you are saying is...

"We'll indoctrinate our own kids thank you very much!" And by controlling your children's education and what they see and learn in school, you are basically censoring them and molding them to your own beliefs instead of teaching them to observe and make their own decisions. Do us all a favor and pull them out and home school them. Perhaps you will create more right wing nutbags with crappy educations, who will eventually be forced to join the armed forces for work and become cannon fodder for wars over Oil on foreign soil?

[vadawg]

65. lol yeah i guess we all need to have our kids taught as you want them

you do realise that what you want me to do is to have my kids molded to what you believe they should learn, i had this argument months ago on DU, when i was told that my culture is not important in their education and i should give control over to their teachers.

[defendandprotect]

163. It depends on the "culture" and I think if it's brought out into the public arena

as at DU . . then you will probably hear everyone's views on that.

If you're talking about Native American culture -- we might all agree.

If you're talking about organized patriarchal religion, we might not.

[girl gone mad]

74. Please don't insult home schooling.

My kid was home schooled and he's brilliant, open-minded and the total polar opposite of this poster's sheltered little ones. I would never in a million years try to prevent him from listening someone else's political or religious opinions simply because I personally disagreed with them. In fact, I encouraged him to read neoconservative philosophy books when he was in middle school so that he could give me his views on the hot "political" ideology of the day. He certainly didn't come away from that experience idolizing Cheney!

[merwin]

77. I think you agree 100% with vadawg on everyting except the "sheltered little ones" part.

There is no "simply because I disagreed with them" in vadawg's statement. He stated that he applies this across the board to all similar events, Republican or Democrat. In fact, I think it's safe to assume that there was no disagreement with the message, but rather with the method of delivery.

[vadawg]

79. lol sheltered, you have no idea of the education my kids get both at school and at home

as to sheltered im laughing my ass of, not at you but just the reaction my mother in law would have at that. your right though we have different thoughts on this, as im sure you would have different thoughts than me in regard to religion, family traditions, history etc etc,

[girl gone mad]

86. You are definitely choosing to shelter them..

from hearing the President speak to them through a television monitor at school. I can only assume you would do this because you don't think they are equipped to think for themselves when confronted with the leader of the free world telling them to stay in school and wash their hands.

I've got to be honest and say that I think it's creepy. I would have lost a lot of respect for my parents if they had pulled a move like that. Bottom line, it says you don't trust your kids. They can pick up on that.

[stuball111]

88. I wasn't "insulting" it.. read the context of my post.

I home schooled my son for two years as well, and he turned out the same polar opposite as this guy. And I did the same thing as far as politics went, and he turned out to be a fine and open minded young man. His curriculum was even from a Christian based home schooling system because it was actually more inclusive than the regular type from the school system. What I was telling him was that if he schooled his kids as he saw fit, they just might wind up on the short end of the stick.

[defendandprotect]

160. Also agree with you . . .

but basically anyone who turns their kids over to organized patriarchal religion --

which is fascism, IMO based on male supremacy -- is also intentionally indoctrinating

them to a belief system which can permanently shut their minds to other realities.

:evilgrin:

[proud2BlibKansan]

103. I didn't say it shouldn't be your decision

I just asked what the magical element is. What are you afraid of?

[vadawg]

105. me, im afraid of nothing, fear has nothing to do with the decision

i think thats were people misunderstand, this is not an emotional thing.

[defendandprotect]

164. People may be misunderstanding . . . but you're also reluctant to be open . . .

and are remaining very vague --

As you can see this causes many to PRESUME what reasons you might have which

you aren't discussing.

I see both sides of this -- and obviously it requires more info and more discussion!

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

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

[girl gone mad]

68. You need to take a few minutes and think about..

the message that you're sending to your children by keeping them home.

You are essentially telling them that they are too stupid and gullible to be able to hear a politician speak without instantly being brainwashed into complete submission. The only other alternative is that you're teaching them to completely disrespect the office of the Presidency and Democracy itself and I would ask you what you would prefer to put in its place?

[vadawg]

70. well going by the posts on this thread who seem to believe that our rights as a minority

should not be respected, and that we should conform to what the majority tell us, or else. Seems to be to me that the problem is with people who dont value diversity within the culture and want everyone to be molded as someone else put it by the system put in place by the majority.. As to disrespecting the office of the presidency, mayby so but i remember a lot of disrespect in the past from both sides towards whomever held the office and it hasnt rent the fabric of the universe..

[girl gone mad]

87. What right is being taken away from you?

Now I think you're just being hyperbolic because you can't make a rational argument as to why it was necessary to shelter your children from listening to the leader of the free world tell them to work hard and stay in school.

[vadawg]

90. well it seems to be the argument that i dont have the right to remove my kids form school

if there is something that goes counter culture.. how do you feel about kids who keep kosher or halal not having to touch pork, or a jewish child being excused for yom kippur, i hate to break it to you but there are as mant diverse students in the schools as you can imagine and simply put i dont want you to accommodate my different beliefs just let me have the opt out option when needed.

[Solomon]

121. Counter-culture?

Wow. Obama's life is the epitome of the American dream. Counter-culture?

[noiretextatique]

190. well...what the hell could it possibly be, except race?

like the other jackasses who objected. obama "counter-culture" :eyes:

[Raineyb]

200. I can come up with no other reason.

All the rationalizations sound like complete and utter bullshit. I guess they figured we wouldn't be able to see through it.

[defendandprotect]

165. That's two more seemingly religious arguments . . . in your thinking .. .

does religion have some bearing on Pres. Obama's speech and your culture?

[Hannah Bell]

99. may i ask what minority you are? sincere question. i tend to agree with

you, something rubs me wrong about politicians giving speeches specifically to "all schoolkids."

i don't have a problem with schoolkids watching or going to see political speeches given to general audiences. nor would it bother me if a politician came & gave a speech at a specific school.

but a speech to "all the kids in the us" has a big brotherish smell, & it makes me uncomfortable that it's become a political issue, with kids being pawns.

i tend to agree it's not appropriate for school. i know if it had been bush doing this, i would have felt it was cynical political manuevering or worse.

[defendandprotect]

167. Agree with you, completely . . . and your question ..... !!

[Mystayya]

125. As much as I am freaked out by the insane reactions of the RWers in regards to the speech

I am likewise disturbed by the reactions of many on this site who are outraged that not everyone is as euphoric as they are over the president's speech and cannot fathom why anyone would not make their children sit and watch. Seriously, why should anyone here care that your kids did not watch a speech by a politician?

I find both extremes creepy and leaning towards insanity.

[olegramps]

126. That is nothing more than crapolla to mask your hatred of Obama.

[Kali]

14. why did you opt out?

[proud2BlibKansan]

24. Fear I guess

[Control-Z]

31. Please, please, please

tell me just one reason that isn't a batshit crazy one. You say there are religious and cultural reasons. I don't understand. Please explain these to me.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

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

[Control-Z]

46. I know

and I'm thoroughly disgusted. I knew it would never answer my question.

How has it managed to stay on the board for so long?

[Skittles]

47. they're supposedly "under-the-radar-trolls"

but to me they're bottom feeders just like the regular ones - put 'em on IGNORE - they're not worth your time and effort

[Control-Z]

51. This one's not under the radar

at the moment. I think we all need to alert more. Honestly, though, I'm never sure just how bad it has to be before doing it.

[Skittles]

53. do it - I can't; I put trolls on IGNORE because they fucking disgust me

[merwin]

56. Actually, the alertable offense here is calling someone a troll.

Which is against the rules here. If you think someone is a troll, the proper response is to use the alert button, not to start yelling troll.

Honestly though, I don't think that saying you want to separate political messages from education is that bad of a reason, considering the reasons that Republicans have been throwing around. Some people have a completely valid belief that politics in education should stay in civics class, and should be a discussion between the teacher and the students, not between the President and the students.

Just sayin'...

[Control-Z]

59. I completely missed it -

the political message. What I heard was a motivational message with no political implications whatsoever.

[vadawg]

62. then i guess you dont get that hes a politician, kinda like if the holy father gave a speech

even though hes talking about the benefits of the wingback system as opposed to the fullback system, hes still a religious figure no matter what hes talking about,

[Control-Z]

72. We each have our own

beliefs and would, therefore, have reason to possibly feel conflict with someone of a different belief speaking to us on any subject. Our president, otoh, is the leader of the entire country. He is president to all of us. See? No conflict, unless of course, you're a disrespectful wingnut. And again, he spoke nothing of politics, so that still should not have been a problem.

[defendandprotect]

172. Whoa . . .wait . . .

Are you saying that if Bush the warmonger/torturer wanted to speak with your kids
in their classroom -- even if it was about staying in school -- that you wouldn't
be the least bit bothered by it?

Sad to say but I certainly object to Obama's continued support for war --
for wiretapping -- and many other subjects the kids wouldn't necessarily be aware
of. In Obama's case, I probably would have expressed and discussed my full criticism,
but I wouldn't have kept them home.

I also think it was a great opportunity for minority school children to finally see
a leader who wasn't a "white" male -- and all children to being to recognize natural
diversity and its benefits.

[Control-Z]

196. If Bush actually had a similar message

to children, and could put it together in coherent sentences, I would not have a problem with him addressing my chidren. It would be an opportunity to show my children that, although I don't agree with him politically, he still has valid points to make, and that the benefits of a good education are universal.

[Hannah Bell]

209. bush had *no* valid points to make. i would very much have a problem

with bush "advising" my children (if i had any) like he was some nice old uncle president.

presidents are politicians, not god-figures to advise & guide the youth of the homeland.

i'd prefer my non-existent children keep that distinction clear.

[merwin]

67. But this person has a valid point in applying it equally to all speeches from politicians.

If he had come as Barack Obama the Parent and not as Barack Obama the President, then maybe it would have been different.

But there is nothing at all wrong with saying you don't want your child to have ANY politician give a televised speech during school hours directly to the children. That is called being consistent in your personal beliefs. If this person feels that they can get the stay in school message across better than Obama, then WTF is the problem?

No matter what the message was, Obama is a politician, and some people do not agree with what he did. Let me put it this way, would you want the Pope directly addressing our school children, regardless of the message? I sure as hell wouldn't, even if it was a "stay in school" message. How is keeping religion out of education any less valid than keeping politics out of education. There is enough political bullshit going on inside of the schools themselves between the school administration and the teachers.

Or maybe if it were George W Bush addressing the kids telling them to stay in school. I don't think the opinion of the speech, even if it were the same word for word, would have been the same here. He would have gotten ripped a new one by people on DU.

And there are political implications simply by Obama giving this speech. Childrens' opinion of him are going to change, which is either going to help or hurt his political career. While I personally see no problem with it, I can see why others would take issue with it... and rightly so. The ones that I don't agree with are those who blindly boycott it because Glenn Beck told them to and not because it is their personal belief.

I think that, had it not been for the intervention of the right wing media, there would have been absolutely no overall uproar about the speech. I also think that there are those who would have kept their kids home from it even then, for whatever reason.

[defendandprotect]

170. A "leader" automatically brings a political message . . .

that's pretty difficult to deny.

I'm for both sides here -- and working my way thru --

The poster is being obviously vague about any specific reason for this other than

what seems now to be religion, tho I'm not sure.

OTOH, as I've said frequently, had Bush the warmonger/torturer wanted to be anywhere

near my kids, I wouldn't have permitted it. Unless it was a full confession of his crimes!


And, unfortunately, Obama is now involved in keeping these wars going.

He's a Democrat and Democratic leadership has keep these wars going almost three

years now past the '06 election. He's protected illegal wiretapping.

You know, these are not all subjects of course that these kids are necessarily familiar

with, but generally the parents are.

A few more hours on this and we may have some better answers!!!



:evilgrin:

[Number23]

81. Exactly. And the one you're referring to who can't spell ignore without putting it in ALL CAPS

for some reason is the main person on this board with a serious Betty Badass complex, forever coming after posters with barrels blazing and then when they hand her her tired little ass, screams "I'm putting you on Ignore!!!one!" and "You're a troll!!!one"

Pitiful. :eyes:

[vadawg]

57. why should i go into the details of my families history and beliefs with someone i dont know

do we now become like the fascists and demand that everyone conform to what the majority belief is, or is there still space for minority religious and cultural beliefs, i guess we should force the Amish kids to watch TV as well as mine...

[stuball111]

64. People here were just curious as to

what those cultural, religious or "minority" beliefs were. If you are uncomfortable doing that then why post those reasons? Does your religion have something against TV? Then why not let them READ the speech? Does your minority position or cultural beliefs ban politics or racial issues? Because the speech contained NONE of those things. There must be another reason, and that must be A.You are a racist and have something against a black president. B. Your cultural beliefs are so strong that you refuse to assimilate into a society that you have chosen to live in and profit from yet despise, then in that case, you ought to move to where your cultural beliefs are more in line with your kind. C. Your own personal politics are being forced on your children, in otherwords, you yourself are "indoctrinating" them, so in that case, why worry about President Obama doing that?

[vadawg]

69. deleted due to misunderstanding...

[Control-Z]

80. This is a progressive board

and you are in line with the right wing fringe on this issue. We've asked your reasons. You won't tell.

It does make a DUer go hmm?

[vadawg]

85. so would you put conscientous objectors as the right fringe because they saw stuff differently

as ive said numerous times, i shouldnt have to give a reason, no one should, every parent should be able to make that choice for themselves. Looking at the answers on this thread should provide you with enough reasons why there are minority cultures who have a hard time keeping their cultures when so many are demanding that we conform to what the majority see as the norm.

[defendandprotect]

176. Of course you can make PRIVATE/PERSONAL decisions . . but then

don't bring that issue out into a public arena if you don't want to discuss it!!!

:eyes:

[Howardx]

191. bingo

wtf?

[stuball111]

84. "YOUR" kind?

Look, in case you didn't notice, we are all of the human race, and live on a planet called earth, so don't give me that crap that you are any different than me. Secondly, you live in The USA. THERE ARE NO "RE_EDUCATION CAMPS HERE! Never was and never will be! Socialism as we know it, and I say that Nazi Germany, and the former USSR and China are NOT socialist. They were hideous dictatorships, and in no way had the social well being of all the populace in their best interest. The right loves to point to this and scare people into believing that that is the direction we are going, and compare people to them. There is about as much chance of Nazzism, Communism, or any other "ism" taking root here in North America that there would be me having a sex change! So, if you are afraid of anything, then share it with us here, maybe we can help you to overcome whatever it is that bothers you. I meant no harm to you nor any disrespect, it's just that when you post something like you did, people are curious as to what your reasons were. Some people here are quite impatient when people aren't willing to give a good reason for something. You mentioned cultural and religious beliefs? Fine, I respect that. as for "Forcing" your beliefs on my son? I encouraged him to follow his own path, and he turned out quite well, has two great kids, and a good job, so I consider my raising of him to be a success. Now, you are either pulling my leg, or you are scared shitless of something that isn't there. As for your beliefs, you are totally entitled to have them in a free society. All I would like to know, is what are they? Try me.... I have an open mind, you might find a friend here. One of the things I was taught, and passed it on to my son, was to not judge people on their culture, religion, or certainly not for being a minority. So if you are really an open minded person, want to learn a bit about that, I'm all ears.

[defendandprotect]

175. BECAUSE . . . YOU brought this message to a public arena . . .you chose to do so . . .

You've been purposefully vague about your reasons for pulling your children from school --

as you can see you are now being assigned "reasons" because people are wrongly presuming things

about you.

You can make your reasons clear, or not--

But you can't hide behind nonsense logic --

When you bring your personal belief systems out into the open on a website such as this,

then your culture and personal beliefs will be questioned and challenged by those reading

your post -- of course!

No one is forcing you to reveal ALL -- but you have been vague to say the least!

[Control-Z]

204. Is it because you have daughters?

That your culture/religion doesn't allow the education and advancement of the 2nd class/women/chattel. If that's the case, it's going to be damned hard to maintain your culture here in America.

[olegramps]

123. Your kids opted out; bull crap you opted out your kids.

What religious or cultural reasons can you cite. What the hell are you doing on this board?

[olegramps]

127. You appear to contradict yourself.

You state that your children opted out of watching the speech and then say their was no problem for us or other families who withdrew there (sic) kids...It should be the parents decision...etc.

I have read down several posts and you decline to state your reasons...except that the speech was to be given by, gasp, the President of the United States, gasp, a politician. Seems awfully vague.

I will support your rights as a parent, however, I really don't think that you are doing your children any good by protecting them from that terribly dangerous rhetoric of staying in school and especially the part about washing your hands.

[vadawg]

228. sorry the use of my words kinda made sense to me, by saying my kids opted out i of course meant

that myself and my wife made the decision to keep them home, as to my reasons they shouldnt matter, as i said parents should be able to opt out there kids for any reason no matter how batshit crazy it seems to others.

[Raineyb]

129. What legitmate cultural reason is there for them not to want their children to watch a speech

by the President?

Is it against their religion for their child to see a black man as someone worthy of respect rather than someone they merely tolerate while continuing to believe themselves superior because that's the only reason why anyone would not want their child to see a speech about the importance of doing your best at school.

When other Presidents spoke to schoolchildren there was none of this opt out bullshit. This isn't a goddamned sex ed class this is a bloody speech about doing well. What's the other side, "Don't learn anything and be a loser?" There is no other side. This is straight racism and I'm tired of people making excuses for it.

[SemperEadem]

179. ::: applause ::::: thank you!

[elleng]

45. Because 'its a free country,'

as we kids said in the playground in Brooklyn 50 years ago!

[liberalhistorian]

151. People homeschool for a LOT of reasons, not just

religious ones, and they have the right to do that, to make such decisions. I know several liberal parents who homeschool and it has nothing to do with hatin' on the gubmint, or paranoia, or religious indoctrination, etc., etc. As long as the district monitors things to make sure they're learning what they're supposed to be learning, there should be no problem with it.

[roody]

49. Next they will be asking to opt out of math.

[liberalhistorian]

148. Very true, that's what my son's district did.

They planned to show it live for any student who wanted to see it, but sent permission slips home that had to be signed first. Apparently, they got a roughly equal number of calls both for and against showing it live, so that's the route they chose.

[pacalo]

180. Why? Would this have happened when the boy king was still squatting in the White House?

This "outrage" was obviously contrived by the GOP, through Fixed News & hate-talk radio, against Obama. It goes without saying that it's too well-organized & wide-spread to have been individual brainchildren of these mindless minions who are, unfortunately, parents.

I hope Obama realizes before too much damage is done that these organized hate campaigns aren't going to stop. Bi-partisanship isn't the answer; Obama has to show them he means business & forget about their whining because they're going to do so regardless of what he does.

[BlooInBloo]

2. They'd rather die, taking their families down with them, than listen to a black guy....

Did they have ANY white folks speaking out against this?

[Liberty Belle]

6. Yes. There were 12 speakers -- all for the President's speech being aired.

Many were white. No one spoke against, though the district claims e-mails it received were heavily against.

I'm told the board has ignored protests in the past, however, when liberals were in the majority.

[BolivarianHero]

9. Here's the thing...

Liberals are smart enough to figure out when they're the silent majority. That the board sounds overwhelmingly liberal speaks for itself. The protesters do not accurately represent the make-up of its constituents.

[Solly Mack]

3. "...children from a very good family"

If her ignorance (and all that stems from it) was any plainer it would be a nose.

[Liberty Belle]

8. I've actually known this family for a few years, indirectly.

Our kids went to school together. The board member has a sister, as I recall, who is a judge. She is not a bad person, was a long-time PTA volunteer etc., but her comments show she is clearly out of touch with what it's like to grow up without a silver spoon in one's mouth, and seems to have some sort of phobia about having her children exposed to the realities of life.

[Solly Mack]

20. She's talking in code

She doesn't want her kids to know of, or be around, poor kids from single parent homes ("intact", "had enough") - families she so obviously disdains and whose parenting skills she questions( "good family" bullshit & "parental support")...because evident in everything she said was that such kids were somehow less and somehow beneath her and her precious little children.

No doubt she sees herself as a good person too....but I don't.

[pokercat999]

32. I'm sure she's fine.

Under that pointed hood and white robe. What? The burning cross, it's just a religious symbol, we're all good, god fear'n christians here. There's nothing here to see, just move along, it'll be OK. What'd mean trees and ropes...we don't do THAT anymore least wise not in the old fashioned way. We're fine upstand'n people round here, like I said all god fear'n christians.

I'm sure she's fine.

:sarcasm:

[Raschel]

192. She's the hypocritical kind who looks down on single moms.

But she had sex like mad while unmarried, just used birth control. Or had an abortion or two. Maybe lived with someone while not married.
(I'm not arguing against any of those)


As long as the evidence, i.e., child, isn't there, everyone pretends they're above it all.

[musette_sf]

199. every time i hear the words "from a very good family"

i want to :puke:

[havocmom]

5. Good! If it gets more sane people involved, perhaps we can get boards that care for education

and not indoctrination like we have had in too many places since the early 70s. The old saw about all politics being local has a lot of wisdom. The far right started the current mess back several decades, and at school board level.

It is way past time to take things back to pro-education and trim the boards of the anti-science, anti-thought march to ignorance too many districts have been subjected to.

[Liberty Belle]

10. Amen to that.

I was actually surprised to learn that our normally ultra-conservative high school board (which includes members who believe in Creationism and which voted to support Prop 8, the gay marriage ban) actually took no position on the Obama video showing, leaving it up to teachers. That said, only a handful actually showed it, which I find deeply troubling.

I wish the state board of education chair would have mandated the showing of this video, no opt-outs, no pandering to those who want to make an issue out of a President simply telling kids to stay in school and follow their dreams. Plus it's disrespectful to the President to make such a fuss. I'd have felt the same even if George Bush had given a video telling kids to stay in school and work hard. As long as there's no political propaganda and the message is aimed at actually helping kids, why should anyone be able to prevent their kids from seeing that? We don't opt sensitive little darlins' out of seeing, say, anti-drug videos or hearing a cross-walk safety talk just because some wack-job parent may want to do so.

Why this?

[LuvNewcastle]

15. I'm glad that the African American board member

is "very articulate.":eyes:

[SemperEadem]

181. she looks rather aghast to me

I know I would be if someone said to me what this woman said. There are more fucked up kids turned out of two parent families who think they are the "right kind of people".

[intheflow]

17. "...now you’re putting them in a room where there are words they don’t understand...

stories they’re being told are about children that they don’t understand, that they can’t relate to.”

Isn't that exactly what school is supposed to be about? Has this woman never heard of vocabulary tests and social studies courses? To widen their worldview beyond what they can see from their bedroom window? God, I feel realy sorry for this woman's children, she must keep them locked in a closet when they're not at school. And I'll bet she got on the school board to make sure all the text books were blank!

[proud2BlibKansan]

21. I never thought these Obama haters would sink this low

This just gets more ridiculous by the day.

[Liberty Belle]

27. Look what a Republican teachers' union leader just posted!

This comment just appeared at the end of our story. Perhaps there is hope out here after all:

I represent the teachers of the La Mesa Spring Valley School District. As reflected by the community we serve, many of the members of our teachers Association are Republican and/or conservative. Today our members were very disheartened to be working in a district that would take such action.

It is patently unfair that we are required to work with very difficult students and our school board would knowingly stop us from using the power of the presidency to motivate the students. I have been a teacher, and an educational leader in this district for almost 25 years. We recently took a 3% pay cut in order to maintain the programs necessary to continue our educational excellence. I am saddened that our Board is is more concerned with partisan politics than about the children they serve.

The teachers I represent will continue to ensure that the students of this district receive an exemplary education as reflected in our school rankings and test scores. I would hope the public is as outraged as we are and will make sure the board hears their displeasure.

[Maru Kitteh]

40. Whoa. That's encouraging.

[bobbolink]

92. The shark has finally been jumped.

[tblue37]

35. One board member's comment was very revealing:

“It bothers me that any number of kids whose parents take them out of school because the school is going to show the program . . . because it’s an idea that a parent thinks something bad is happening there that this ugly person up there in the office that they didn’t vote for is going to be putting something on their child that they didn’t want,” he said. <emphasis added>

[KelleyKramer]

147. "ugly person" = black guy

Well, there you have it. I was born and raised in the deep south, that is racism pure and simple.

And when he is at home or with his friends, he uses a completely different term for 'black guy'.

[ddeclue]

37. Run Forrest Run - For school board that is!

I'm glad it is inspiring him to think about running - if he's never run for office and wants some advice getting started, I've consulted with and worked on a number of campaigns here in Florida and would be happy to give him some pointers!

:bounce:

[itsrobert]

38. The speech wasn't shown at Serra High in Tierrasanta either

The Principle hasn't responded yet to my email as to why.

[Skittles]

41. what's with this "articulate African -American" thing?

why is it necessary to include the word ARTICULATE? Is that an anomaly among African-Americans? I've known, er, articulate African Americans my whole life.

[Liberty Belle]

54. Because she was the only articulate board member,

our writer certainly didn't mean that there's anything unusual about an African American being articulate -- but merely that it was a breath of fresh air to hear something speaking truth at this board meeting.

[merwin]

58. What just took plcae would be called overcompensation...

picking out racism where it does not exist. There are articulate people in this world, and there are non-articulate people. Currently, the non-articulate ones seem to be far more vocal which would lend people to, like you said, see it as a breath of fresh air.

Obama is articulate. That's one of his traits and I am proud to apply it to him after 8 long years of the shit-spewing that was George W Bush's presidency.

[Hannah Bell]

101. "articulate board member"

[CakeGrrl]

66. It's a racist red flag - a condescension toward blacks

Chris Rock did a bit about the "compliments" he'd heard about Colin Powell: "He speaks so well!" "He's so well-spoken!"

It's as if they feel they have to credit an 'articulate' black person for going against what they perceive to be the ghetto-speak/Ebonics norm.

Whites are never characterized as 'articulate', because it's implicit that they can be understood when they speak.

[Raschel]

139. It's one of the reasons loonies didn't want their kids to watch the speech.

They may grow up thinking it's not unusucal for a Black person to be "articulate".

Or a leader

Or not scary

Or brilliant

Or compassionate

[girl gone mad]

55. How sheltered are these kids?

Unless mommy and daddy are multimillionaires, the kids are going to be so screwed when they grow up and have to go out into the real world.

[flvegan]

71. As the Prez of the Board of Education, why is she only thinking of her kids?

And what tv shows does she shield her kids from that they likely "don't understand" seeing everyday? How does Spongebob talk? Why is Lindsay Lohan holding hands with a girl? Why are we in Afghanistan?

[gopiscrap]

76. Wow

[bridgit]

93. I am concerned for the children of these people, especially as they lay on a couch...

next to their shrink at some point future as it sinks in they were raised by ignorant bigoted white trash and *that's* the reason happiness and diverse, interpersonal relationships are for them forever elusive. We already have an image of what it is to see someone eating their own brain assuming there's anything in there

[TheKentuckian]

100. Parents seem to see their children as property.

You have a stewardship not a possession and your rights should not exceed their interests and communities have zero special insight into curriculum. The kids in a tiny town in S. Dakota have the exact same educational needs as the kids in New York City both groups must now be prepared to compete not just locally or even nationally but worldwide. Community guidance is needed for the right mix of types of schools for different kinds of minds like a range from traditional to liberal schools and how many of each but this need to attempt to guide what information needs to be covered seems limited in scope of vision. I can see pushing for ADDITIONAL standards and material but omission of information will only bite those without a voice in the ass in the end.

[vadawg]

102. so do you feel the same way about religion in schools, should they be free to do full on

or do you want them just to limit to comparative religious classes, seems that everyone is okay with stuff as long as it fits there idea of what should be taught,

[FlaGranny]

110. Which do you like best?

Apples or oranges?

[panzerfaust]

117. The best bit was

... the board member who conflated the US Constitution, with some local school board rules.

Reactionaries know only suppression, value only mindless conformity: Which sums, for me, my experiences in public schools.

[My Good Babushka]

128. I'm more of a pop-in than a regular poster, but

as I read I was confused by the obfuscating "reasons" of "culture" which prompted vadawg to censor the President's speech. To be informed about the president is not a matter of "culture". If you live in America it is a shared, common, civic responsibility. A prerequisite if you want children to participate in political life in a meaningful way as adults. All cultures come together to participate in the democracy- that is what it is all about.

[Lars39]

131. Please pop-in more often!

:hi:

[Spazito]

136. Well said! n/t

[Control-Z]

203. I hope he reads your response.

Very well stated. Glad you popped in!

[Hannah Bell]

211. that's your ideal. it's not the ideal of every US sub-culture. nor the reality.

[Swamp Rat]

146. k&r

[Ajaye]

198. The words "control over our kids"

gives you a clue. Allowing your children to listen to a benign school pep talk encouraging them to do well in school, by the President of the United States, is not giving anybody "control over" anybody's kids.

That suspicion of government and authority is a good instinct in some ways, but not in this context. This isn't the government wiretapping your house, or lying about why we're going to war or detaining people indefinitely without charge or...do you see my drift here?

If you do not believe the President of the United States is entitled to any respect, if you do not believe the office is worthy of respect, then so be it. It just seems very strange that people who never said a word about this ever before now seem so overwrought about an inoccuous speech.

[Hannah Bell]

210. it's not occurred before, to my knowledge, that the president made

a nationally televised speech, specifically targeted to schoolkids, timed to be (ideally) sent into every classroom, giving advice to schoolchildren, complete with (initially) a suggested lesson plan "tell how you can help the president".

it's not the president's job. it's not a good precedent.

[FlaGranny]

213. Well,

THAT precedent was already provided by GW. Not like it's the first time in history a president spoke to school children. I don't recall anyone being upset when Regan did it, or Bush. Anyhow, why is it so horrible to ask youngsters for suggestions? You're not giving suggestions, you're asking for them. Paranoia runs rampant, but this is a little more ridiculous than most. Targeted? Well who else would you target with a message to stay in school and work hard - senior citizens? Illegal aliens? Martians? It is disappointing that they removed the section from the lesson plan asking for suggestions. It would be a fine thing if young people spoke up and gave their opinions.

What a stupid, mixed up, paranoid, delusional country we live in.

P.S. The president SHOULD, definitely and repeatedly, encourage education. Education is the most important part of bringing the country into a future of prosperity for everyone who works hard for it.

[Hannah Bell]

215. as i said, i recall no previous occasion of a nationally televised presidential

speech directed specifically to schoolchildren & designed to be broadcast to them on their first week of school in their classrooms. correct me if i'm wrong. waiting for your link.

[SemperEadem]

216. but just because YOU don't recall it doesn't mean it hasn't happened.

http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1988/111488c.htm

http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2009/09/george_hw_bushs_speech_to_scho.php

all you needed to do was google it.

[Hannah Bell]

217. thank you, reagan & bush 1, i stand corrected. & still feel the same.

[SemperEadem]

218. of course.. pride goes before destruction and the haughty spirit before the fall

I'm not surprised one bit.

[Hannah Bell]

224. about what?

[Raineyb]

222. Now you stand corrected? Would be nice if you admitted you were wrong

when you were busy trying to accuse me of "crying racism" when there wasn't any based on your "belief" that no other president made such a speech.

[Hannah Bell]

225. i haven't changed my opinion on that, so why should i "admit i was wrong"?

i just admitted i was wrong in my belief that no other president had made a speech directed at the nation's schoolchildren & televised into their classrooms. though there isn't enough detail in the links to determine how closely analogous the occasions were, nor what the reaction of schools & parents were, the detail is enough to say i was wrong.

i'm perfectly willing to admit when i'm wrong about matters of fact.

but my opinion re crying wolf, & the misuse of the charge of racism is unchanged. & i don't believe that racism is the underlying motive force in current attacks on obama. you & i have different notions of what underlies social & political behavior, & i don't think there's common ground.

[Webster Green]

214. I emailed Halgren yesterday. Got a response today.

Here is my email, and her response:

Madam,
I’m ashamed that you live in California. Why don’t you move to Alabama, where blatant racism is the norm.

Unbelievable that you think the President of the United States is a threat to our children.

You should be ashamed, and you definitely should lose your job. This is outrageous political pandering to the extreme right wing Nazis in this country. Thank God you are a small minority, and will be even smaller as normal people realize how insane you are.

Asshole!!


Her response:

Sir -
I realize now that I made a mistake. It was not politically motivated, and if I had it to do over, I would have voted to show the speech live.

Please accept my apology for the distress this has caused.

Sincerely,
Penny Halgren

[Liberty Belle]

219. Can you fax that letter to me?

619-698-7628

I would like to pubilsh it. Also have you contacted her again to see if they might air the video another day this week - better late than never?

[Webster Green]

223. I'll try to do it tomorrow..

I'll send you the series of emails I sent and received. When she sent the apology, I replied to her and apologized for my language. She replied to thank me. My original email subject line was: "You are a racist piece of shit!"

I have not asked about airing the video another time, but that's a good idea.

I also left phone messages with the School Superintendent and the Assistant Superintendent. The Superintendent returned my call, but I missed it. He just left his number, and I haven't had a chance to return his call. I talked to a staffer at the assistant super's office, and let her know how pissed I was. She seemed to sympathize, and said she would pass the message along.

I PM'ed you earlier with this, BTW. :hi: