TexasCHLforum.com

pdubyoo wrote:

Purplehood wrote:Of course he has an agenda, but he doesn't have to spend every waking moment pursuing it.

That's what he appointed the czars for!

That is actually funny.

Purplehood wrote:

pdubyoo wrote:

Purplehood wrote:Of course he has an agenda, but he doesn't have to spend every waking moment pursuing it.

That's what he appointed the czars for!

That is actually funny.

It really get's funny when one takes a look at his latest appointment, Van Jones, green jobs czar, who is perhaps the most extremist of the extreme in the entire lot. As a self-avowed, self-identified Communist, Jones abhors liberty, the Constitution, the American way of life, and seeks to change it from top to bottom.

I remember Odumbell telling us all to judge him by the people he surrounds himself with. I believe I will do just that.

Liberty wrote:I see it a little different. Its an opportunity to teach our children

Remember we as parents get to have tha last word. I do not believe in isolating our children from the evils of socialism, but instead we should be exposing the children to evils and the consequences of such evils. Children should be aware that evil can present itself itself in the means of a charismatic leader. We should show them how Stalin and Hitler lead millions to their death and they did it by taking away our rights a little bit of a time. Children can understand that the more that the goverment does the more government takes away from good people. Children need to be exposed and understand the principles of consequences. and that evil isn't always done by roughian types and that satan can present himself in the form of a smooth talking charismatic politician.

This will be a great oportunity to show how poorly socialist governments have done.. Tell and show them about communist China, Cuba and Venesuala.
With children everything is a learning experience .. Its up to us as parents to but it all in context. We need to understand what they are exposed to and present it in a proper light. censorship is a poor alternative.

The big problem with this fantasy is that we cannot have the same influence on our children as their peer group at school. This is not the same as drugs or some other vice. Teachers and even the president say drugs are bad. But with socialistic politics, the support group is all chanting in unison. After all, how can supporting the current regime be a bad thing??? All the teachers are telling you to follow his principles, your fellow students all think it is "cool" to support the first BLACK president. It makes you a racist to appose him or his ideas and being a racist is the worst thing you can be. Our children have already been indoctrinated by the day care centers to believe life should be fair. Now the government will play that angle to justify socialistic ideology.

Unfortunately Liberty, the peer group brain washing is going to make the parent insignificant in this issue. We are not playing on even grounds here for the hearts and minds of our children. Acceptance in the peer group is everything to a young person. Your dreaming to think a child is willing to be cast out for the sake of their parents ideas of politics. Between the president, the teachers and administrators and finally their fellow students, you the parent, will be painted as "old fashioned" and "out of touch" with the new "cool" way of thinking.

The man got elected using the ole smoke and mirrors trick. The same smoke and mirrors is now being used to push forth the anti-American sentiment of his regime.

Dear Teacher ,

Please excuse my child for being absent this coming Tuesday as he will be sick that day .

Thank you .

They already backpedaled a couple of times on this. Imagine the sermon Obama would have delivered if nobody spoke up.

boomerang wrote:They already backpedaled a couple of times on this. Imagine the sermon Obama would have delivered if nobody spoke up.

Yep...I heard that tonight also. Seems premier Obama has decided to back off his original agenda, for now. We must be ever vigilant or this enemy of freedom will destroy our nation from within.

Finally, someone had to be burning the midnight oil to get this done...(Yeah, this speech has no political undertones???)

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/art ... gD9AIQTPG0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

An initial excerpt from Obama’s speech to the kiddos...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Some of you might not have those advantages. Maybe you don’t have adults in your life who give you the support that you need. Maybe someone in your family has lost their job, and there’s not enough money to go around. Maybe you live in a neighborhood where you don’t feel safe, or have friends who are pressuring you to do things you know aren’t right.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well thats about as motivating as getting a colonoscapy thingy...

#1 I guess there’s always hope that affirmative action will take care of all those disadvantages he’s talking about...

#2 Not enough adults in your life??? Well we have a program for all ages to fix that...

#3 Lost your job??? Don’t worry, we’ll spread the wealth, remember when I told that rich “white” plumber guy that plan???

#4 If you don’t live in a safe nieghborhood??? We’ll come in in the next couple of years when the heat dies off of congress and pass “reasonable gun confiscation” nobody I know needs a Tec-9 for hunting!!!

#5 And stay out of gangs, but make sure you take a look and consider joining my Civilian Defense and Snitch Corp.

boomerang wrote:They already backpedaled a couple of times on this. Imagine the sermon Obama would have delivered if nobody spoke up.

Notice they waited way into last night before getting the "text" of the "speech" out to the public???

The link I found noted it was posted 9 hours ago...

And I honestly believe this is a total re-write...

But there is no way there is anything political in that thing...

Newt Gingrich states that he read the speech and thought it was "good". That came from FOX News.

EDIT: Just watched him again on the news... he stated that both Reagan and Clinton spoke to the students and that they were positive experiences. Gingrich advised anyone that is concerned to go to the White House website and read the speech.

I realize that lots of folks don't like the President. But knee-jerk reactions by folks that don't like him simply teach our kids to be totally intolerant and not listen to other peoples points of view. I too don't trust the guy, but I really really try to avoid jumping to conclusions. Let your kids watch the speech. Discuss the good points of it with your kids. If there are any bad, discuss those too. Be adult. Doesn't mean you have to vote for him.

Purplehood wrote:Newt Gingrich states that he read the speech and thought it was "good". That came from FOX News.

EDIT: Just watched him again on the news... he stated that both Reagan and Clinton spoke to the students and that they were positive experiences. Gingrich advised anyone that is concerned to go to the White House website and read the speech.

I realize that lots of folks don't like the President. But knee-jerk reactions by folks that don't like him simply teach our kids to be totally intolerant and not listen to other peoples points of view. I too don't trust the guy, but I really really try to avoid jumping to conclusions. Let your kids watch the speech. Discuss the good points of it with your kids. If there are any bad, discuss those too. Be adult. Doesn't mean you have to vote for him.

I agree with Newt, that the current speech is "good". It's a positive and encouraging message to the students. I don't remember there being any concern with Reagan, Bush or Clinton, from either side of the aisle, that there would be an attempt to use the forum to advance political agendas

Like you, I don't trust this President either. When I heard about the planned speech, I seriously questioned his initial intentions, and I stand by that opinion, but I wouldn't call it a knee-jerk reaction. The fact that the speech wasn't posted until late yesterday speaks volumes. This has been a front-burner story since early last week. If the original speech was so innocent and sanitary, they could have posted it last week to squelch the opposition. Also, I downloaded the planned activity curriculum early last week, and the questions that were to be posed to the students were out of line..."what will you do to support the president?". The current activity curriculum has been sanitized as well.

So, the question I have is...why change anything in the speech and curriculum if there wasn't anything to be concerned about in the first place?

The President's high school speech just ended. I listened and watched with great intensity. I digested and dissected every word he said. Where WAS the socialist indoctrination we were expecting? Where WAS the brainwashing we were told to expect?

I tried as hard as I could to shoot holes in his speech...to find something I could object to, even a little bit. But I couldn't. I could find nothing to fault in his speech. Nothing.

Public outcry made him have to alter the speech.

joe817 wrote:The President's high school speech just ended. I listened and watched with great intensity. I digested and dissected every word he said. Where WAS the socialist indoctrination we were expecting? Where WAS the brainwashing we were told to expect?

I tried as hard as I could to shoot holes in his speech...to find something I could object to, even a little bit. But I couldn't. I could find nothing to fault in his speech. Nothing.

Of course, the speech writers had over a week to "change" the speech. Obama would have been an idiot to have allowed any hint of a political agenda in today's speech, with the amount of scrutiny it was under. They had no choice but to rewrite it just to get out of the cross-hairs. Even the director of the DOE admitted that the initial curriculum, that was to be used before and after the speech, was "not worded well" in the initial drafts that were posted last week.

The President had no choice but to stick to education virtues.

As I see it, that was the concern initially... there were no plans to release the text of the speech ahead of time.

pdubyoo wrote:I don't remember there being any concern with Reagan, Bush or Clinton, from either side of the aisle, that there would be an attempt to use the forum to advance political agendas

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opini ... 94347.html

when President George H.W. Bush delivered a similar speech on October 1, 1991, from Alice Deal Junior High School in Washington DC, the controversy was just beginning. Democrats, then the majority party in Congress, not only denounced Bush's speech -- they also ordered the General Accounting Office to investigate its production and later summoned top Bush administration officials to Capitol Hill for an extensive hearing on the issue.

Unlike the Obama speech, in 1991 most of the controversy came after, not before, the president's school appearance. The day after Bush spoke, the Washington Post published a front-page story suggesting the speech was carefully staged for the president's political benefit. "The White House turned a Northwest Washington junior high classroom into a television studio and its students into props," the Post reported.