Parents and lawmakers speak out against Obama's speech to students

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

How could the parents have a "legit issue" if THEY never saw the speech?

The parents assumed it would be political because, well, political hacks always assume everything is political. The actual speech couldn't have been less political if it were entirely centered on the 2005 White Sox and their propensity to score nearly exclusively via the home run.

The Occam's Razor solution is that the parents' concerns were bred much more of fear-mongering and political hackery than from some sort of PTO feel-good hyper-involvement with their kids' educations.

This is also why baci's point holds so little water - all the sudden, this is the precise moment when a sea of (ONLY REPUBLICAN) parents become overwhelmingly involved with schooling? Really? It's cognitive dissonance at its finest, and I have absolutely no qualms saying that.

why bother with this fellow?

On the other hand...look at it like this, in a twisted way, this is probably the most involved that some of these parents have been in thier schools in a long, long time. Heh!!!!

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

why bother with this fellow?

As baci showed, there are other posters who are non-trolling, intelligent individuals who were along for the ride here, too - since it's not a flame war, there's still something to be gleaned from discussion, even if the source is playing Successful Troll is Successful.

[DrPhil]

I believe Obama had his speech edited in light of the criticisms.

I heard much of the speech today and I heard borderline socialist undertones. Any reference to things along the lines of (not verbatum) "help me to help this country" and "if you don't stay in school, you let down your country" are collectivism, which is good, but can detour into pseudosocialism if tax payers aren't conscious and critical at every turn.

It all goes back to what I've been saying all along (besides that he talks too damn much and is as annoyingly visible as Beyonce is). Obama wants to be liked and revered. He wants to be considered an eloquent speaker and yadayadayada. Not necessary to be a good POTUS. I don't have to like the POTUS. Just do your job and we as a people need to remain aware and critical.

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

I believe Obama had his speech edited in light of the criticisms.

I heard much of the speech today and I heard borderline socialist undertones. Any reference to things along the lines of (not verbatum) "help me to help this country" and "if you don't stay in school, you let down your country" are collectivism, which is good, but can detour into pseudosocialism if tax payers aren't conscious and critical at every turn.

It all goes back to what I've been saying all along (besides that he talks too damn much and is as annoyingly visible as Beyonce is). Obama wants to be liked and revered. He wants to be considered an eloquent speaker and yadayadayada. Not necessary to be a good POTUS. I don't have to like the POTUS. Just do your job and we as a people need to remain aware and critical.

If telling kids "if you don't stay in school, you let down your country" can lead to socialism, sign me up....if asking your nations children to be educated citizens means that you are a socialist (which I think is reducing the the term a little...a term, by the way, which though not necessarily right for the USA is not an evil entity) we should all be socialists. What's wrong with wanting better for the next generation and better for our nation?

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

If telling kids "if you don't stay in school, you let down your country" can lead to socialism, sign me up....if asking your nations children to be educated citizens means that you are a socialist (which I think is reducing the the term a little...a term, by the way, which though not necessarily right for the USA is not an evil entity) we should all be socialists. What's wrong with wanting better for the next generation and better for our nation?

You made a huge leap here. Obviously there is nothing wrong with the bolded.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

I heard much of the speech today and I heard borderline socialist undertones. Any reference to things along the lines of (not verbatum) "help me to help this country" and "if you don't stay in school, you let down your country" are collectivism, which is good, but can detour into pseudosocialism if tax payers aren't conscious and critical at every turn.

... but this has been a risk since, well, the New Deal at the latest, and possibly decades before that, hasn't it?

The reality is that the US system has always integrated socialist/collectivist elements into its otherwise Federalist/Republic/Democratic nature.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

... but this has been a risk since, well, the New Deal at the latest, and possibly decades before that, hasn't it?

The reality is that the US system has always integrated socialist/collectivist elements into its otherwise Federalist/Republic/Democratic nature.

I think most people realize this. The problem is with going further down that path, particularly feeling as though we're being hoodwinked and bamboozled into doing so.

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

I believe Obama had his speech edited in light of the criticisms.

I heard much of the speech today and I heard borderline socialist undertones. Any reference to things along the lines of (not verbatum) "help me to help this country" and "if you don't stay in school, you let down your country" are collectivism, which is good, but can detour into pseudosocialism if tax payers aren't conscious and critical at every turn.

It all goes back to what I've been saying all along (besides that he talks too damn much and is as annoyingly visible as Beyonce is). Obama wants to be liked and revered. He wants to be considered an eloquent speaker and yadayadayada. Not necessary to be a good POTUS. I don't have to like the POTUS. Just do your job and we as a people need to remain aware and critical.

I still don't see the problem. How does that detour into socialism? Seems like you and too many members of the general public are just grasping at straws at this point.

And why are you always criticizing his speaking ability? Do you say that about every single President? I could understand a few remarks here and there, but now you are just sounding sour and bitter. I didn't think Bush was eloquent, but I didn't say it every single time he gave a speech. Have you not realized by now that ALL Presidents generally give quite a few speeches? Besides, I would rather have a President who actively tries to inform the public instead of one who stays silent and expects the public to just go along because he's the President.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

How does that detour into socialism?

You do not see how collectivism can detour into socialism if we are not careful? "Help the government to help you" "you let down your country if you don't do this"

It's just a look at the various stages that bring countries to the social and economic systems that they have. It doesn't happen overnight; and, agree or disagree, that is just an observation of people's fear of the potential. It isn't a prediction.

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

And why are you always criticizing his speaking ability?

Obviously, I have a problem with it. People unfairly criticized G.W. all the time and called him dumb. Some people did that everytime G.W. was mentioned. At least G.W. hadn't convinced himself that he was such an eloquent and influential leader that he had to CONSTANTLY talk to us about something.

We are going down a dark road and setting a bad precedent when the POTUS will not shut up. The POTUS is not THE White House representative and we do have a system of checks and balances that should never be blurred.

For many people, it conjures up Stalinist images of a "leader" whose power is taken to a new height via nonstop speeches to the masses and an eventual "cult of personality."