2008 Weblog Award Winner

  • 2008 Weblog Awards Winner

Help Win the Fight Against Breast Cancer


  • Google

    This blog

Babel Fish

Blog Visitors


  • website counter
My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2005

« Feeling Smart: Here's the Website for the Official SAT Question of the Day | Main | TED Video of the Week: Hans Rosling: Let my dataset change your mindset »

Thursday, September 03, 2009


Christine Potthast

Mr. Fallick

your concerns about the speech of president Obama were ridiculous. Any child that did not have a chance to watch that speech was deprived of a very valuable experience. I made sure my son was at home at the time of the speech and was able to see it.

Those who are spreading irrational fears are the ones who are trying to exercise undue influence over those who cannot yet make decisions for themselves.

'Orwellian'? - You don't know what you are talking about.

Christine Potthast

Shelley Starnes Garner

Even though this speech may not be political in its actual words, it is undeniably political in nature because of the sender - the President speaking to a captive audience of children. The speech by Obama is wrong and grossly inappropriate for any classroom. If the president wants to speak to children, he can speak to his own. And if he wants to speak to all American children he should do so with / through their parents.

Mike Falick

In response to Polimom:

The "qualifier" as you put it is neither unnecessary nor superfluous. If President Obama's speech is solely motivational, then it is vastly different than if it is politically motivated. I don't think there would have been anywhere near the concern about the speech had the Department of Education not included the curriculum on the website announcing the speech.

As an aside, being concerned about this issue does not make one a flat-earther, and it is insulting for you to compare my comments to those who believe that 9/11 was "an inside job."

Perry A. Ruthven


I can only imagine what the current dissenting crowd would have said had anyone decided that their child should not be present to hear a speech by president George W. Bush, say, well, anytime. I imagine the call from the same crowed that fears the president of the greatest democracy in the history of the world would be akin to "traitor!"

Allowing the politics of fear, and this is what it is, to govern the motives of how people may perceive what MAY be said seems to be the truly Orwellian part.

Anyhow, I'll hope parents allow their children to hear OUR president and hope the president inspires, as any president should, our school children to become the best citizens they can be. I cringe at the though that parents may deny their children the opportunity to participate in a national event by forcing them to cower in fear from the 'unknown'. The ironic part is what we all know; when parents deny children things that seem OK, they instinctively want to find out more about it. My experience tells me the kids are more likely to sense that their parents to not trust them to.....simply hear the the president speak! It is interesting to ponder the idea that the whole thing may back fire on the parents looking to opt out when the speech is given and deemed entirely appropriate! The kids may just begin to gravitate towards the president and seek to hear him more!

Although the asking for a letter from the kids is a point to nit pic apart politically, one would hope that school children, as they so often do, come up with their OWN ideas on what the president needs help with. I would not be surprise to see letters that think he needs to be less liberal! Who knows, but to shield them from the possibilities and the chance to create is a disservice to the trust that we should have that a presidential speech is not something to fear.

Maybe he will do better than Reagan in keeping political ideology out of it when he decided to speak to the school children. http://mediamatters.org/blog/200909030020


You said:
Many people, including me, believe that while the President's stated intent of inspiring children is clearly a good message, the speech may be political in nature delivered to a captive audience of students.

Here, let's get rid of that pesky qualifier in the middle of the sentence for you. I'll help:

Many people, including me, believe that the speech may be political in nature delivered to a captive audience of students.

Much more straightforward that way, yes?

Of course, in this form, I'm mostly reminded of the folks who believe that the moon landing was shot in a television studio, and/or that 9/11 was actually an inside job.

The comments to this entry are closed.

School Bell Award Winner

May 2012

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    


  • Please sign up here to get a weekly email with updates to this blog.

    Or you can sign up to get an email whenever this site is updated here:

Your email address:

Powered by FeedBlitz