President Entitled to Indoctrinate Children?
Regarding his plans to address virtually all American children in their schools, is President Obama operating within his proper sphere of authority as President of the United States? Probably, though it’s certainly debatable. But what he has to say – and what teachers do with his words – may give many parents reason answer in the negative.
Yesterday Patterico analyzed the Department of Education’s suggested lessons and the result was a clear, disturbing, and deliberate attempt to indoctrinate our children in the liberal ideology.
Today I see that the DoE has withdrawn one of the more controversial bullet points, an assignment that would have, in the DoE’s language, had children, “Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president”, presumedly for a grade.
I’m glad to see both the firestorm of disapproval that burst into being after this blatantly ideological lesson plan was made public and the DoE’s quiet retreat. Gives me a bit more faith in my country when the people rebel, reject something that’s so obviously wrong, and force the government to back down and remember its place.
That said, President Obama will still be addressing American school children in their classrooms next week. Given that attendance is compulsory for these children, Mr. Obama is ethically obligated to give what one might term a truthful, inspiring, and politically benign speech.
To politicize schools – already brought low by decades of liberal agenda items such as the elimination of corporal punishment, forced integration, and multiculturalism – would be utterly inappropriate and thoroughly reprehensible.
I applaud Mr. Obama’s interest in the education of our children. He could use this chance to inspire an entire generation of children to live up to American traditions and ideals. I hope that he does. I just wish I could trust him to do the right thing. Given what his Department of Education tried to foist upon students, it may impossible to do so this time. Presidents, like ordinary citizens, must earn the trust of others. Little in this president’s reign to-date has done so and this episode is another mark in the negative column.
Should parents boycott his speech and hold their children out of classes next Tuesday? I say not necessarily, for a couple of reasons. First, the intensity of the controversy has very likely parried the president’s ability to make an overly ideological presentation. More than likely his speech will be safe for all ages and Democrats will afterwards attempt to spin conservative and libertarian anger as a typical, perhaps even racist, overreaction.
Second, I think that parents of older students would be better advised to seize the opportunity, while it has their interest, and give their children the knowledge they need to defend themselves against the liberal agenda that is consistently pushed on them through the public school system. Viewed with open eyes, even the most blatant political indoctrination attempts serve more to awaken disgust in those targeted for conversion than win them over. Parents, open your kids’ eyes and let the liberals talk. The more that happens, the better off your children will be.
If Mr. Obama is truly interested in helping school children, a more appropriate way for him to address them would be to make his video available to parents prior to it being shown to their children. Better yet, the president could post his speech on YouTube and air it during prime-time television hours so that parents could watch it with their children and advise them as to its truth and accuracy.
Or is that is the very thing the Department of Education had hoped to avoid?
No their is no Hitler youth in America.
There is no Indoctrination.
There is no Rock star adoration in this country.
There is no brainwashing going on by the Barak Handlers.
This is all a figment of our imagination. Barak Obama won the presidency and defeated the Clinton Machine because he is just that good.
Repeat after me….there is no attempt by Barak Obama’s handlers (who are freakin clueless when it comes to issues…you know like health care) to make Barak Obama the next American Idol and to have the people LOVE him because hes just so cool despite his political short commings.
No there is no attempt at this. Never has been. This is just the rights paranoia sticking out again.
‘Gives me a bit more faith in my country when the people rebel, reject something that’s so obviously wrong, and force the government to back down and remember its place.”
Yes it does… It bothers me that the “spirit” of what is right is tossed aside so easily. Would he be within his rights to talk to the students on national TV? of course. (tell kids to study hard, make us proud, etc.) But it is what is behind the veil that we need to worry about. (The lesson plans were very disturbing) I hate to think that we need to worry about such things. But I am obviously not alone in my worry. Whre were these ideas when Bush was in office? would the NEA have thrown a fit if Bush asked for the same? of course they would have.
Were there any other items in the lesson plan that you found offensive or over the line other than the single bullet point?
vs
The second formulation is more appropriate and it is good that it is being substituted. None of the rest appears controversial. When I was teaching High School (Bush was president) lessons like this were not at all uncommon.
Is the speech compulsory or are schools and classes given latitude to either show it or not? I would be willing to bet the latter, but that its use will be widespread if for no other reason that it is easy*.
* prepared lesson plan with a long video and largely subjective responses that will most likely be graded primarily on participation.
Jeb, I pretty much agree with you on this. And at least according to our school district’s superintendent (we got a letter sent home with the kids today) the schools are given latitude, and parents are also given the ability to opt their kids out (of course that sort of thing is always a bit awkward, but still- it’s not compulsory.)
Personally I think a good approach would be to have public officials giving civics lessons and encouraging the kids to participate in democracy but to question political rhetoric and develop critical thinking skills. If NEA and school boards would adopt that kind of agenda for having POTUS or other elected officials bringing messaging into the classroom, I’d be all for it. As it is now, if Obama’s going to give a pep talk on working hard, reaching for educational goals, etc…eh, no harm I guess but I doubt it’ll have much effect one way or the other.
Eh, I don’t see much in Patterico’s list that fills me with dread. Maybe the stuff about during the speech, and the “What does he want me to do” items after it, but that is about it. Even then, I don’t get OMG!HIDE vibes. In any case, the rest of it is stuff that I actually think is pretty good.
As for “the liberal agenda in public schools” I’ll have you know that I come from none too a conservative a town (controlled by the Democrats for years until recently) in bluer than the sky Connecticut, and while I might track on the liberal side socially, I’ve always considered myself an economic moderate. If there is an overt liberal agenda here, it’s not getting very far.
Case in point: The very reason I supported the Heller decision is that I have had life-long learning, including in school, that the 2nd amendment gave an individual right. There were never any lessons or lectures to try and dissuade me of this.
I recall several Democratic congressmen were unhappy with President Bush for making a similar speech to school children. I do think they had a point then, and the critics of President Obama’s speech to school children are equally right to be concerned. Anything that even LOOKS like partisan politics using the schools is really not appropriate for the President of the United States. While I don’t see most of the points on the prepared list as problematic, I do think it might cause reasonable parents to feel uncomfortable to have the President encouraging their child to volunteer for some kind of community service specifically to help the President’s agenda.
I do not see anything wrong with the President speaking, in general terms, to the nation’s youth. However, his remarks should be made available far enough in advance so that parents may decide for themselves if they want their child to participate. Anything that has the appearance of campaign mode should be clearly out of bounds.
Wanna know why the White House is asking students to write letters about how to help the president?
It’s because we elected a know-nothing “community organizer” who is now so disorganized, that he’s begging OUR KIDS for advice!
Can you just imagine if Billy Graham wanted to speak to the children about what they can do to help God?
Or how about Van Jones speaking to the kids about what they can do to help create a green economy.
How about someone whose a staunch Global Warming Advocate speaking about what they can do to stop global warming.
A priest speaking to the Children about how they can be better Christians.
How about An Oman speaking about Islam.
The Israeli Prime Minster on how to help Israel.
I mean the list goes on and on. When is enough. Enough. We all know that the schools are full of Democrats and Republican teachers. What about the teacher who gets carried away. Preaches to her children. Sees the opportunity to indoctrinate the kids?
I just think its a bad, bad idea. What can the kids do to help the president. I know….shouldnt we have equal time? Shouldnt the GOP get a response to this? Shouldnt Rush Limbaugh get to speak to the kids and tell them what a dirt bag Obama is?
Yeah then we can start our kids hollaring at each other in kindergarten.
This is stupid. Its beyond stupid….its the Obama handlers grooming the rock star Obama because they cant do nothing else. They are clueless when it comes to governing so they might as well continue campaigning for the next 3.5 years.
After the President of the United States speaks to school children about the value of education, Republicans will make opposing comments extolling ignorance.
See:
http://notionscapital.wordpress.com/2009/09/04/obamas-dangerous-message-to-our-children/
On November 14, 1988, President Reagan addressed and took questions from students from four area middle schools in the Old Executive Office Building. The speech was broadcast live and rebroadcast by C-Span, and Instructional Television Network fed the program “to schools nationwide on three different days.”
In his speech to students and the question and answer session following Reagan
1. stressed the importance of low taxes and free trade.
2. stressed the importance of religion in our nation.
3 touted the economic achievements of his administration ,
4.put in a plug for the line item veto,
5. told the students that lowering taxes increases revenue
6. boasted of his administrations aid to Negro colleges
7. and told students that if guns were banned, burglars would be “celebrating forevermore”
http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1988/111488c.htm
Two years before that Reagan again spoke to the children of America on nationwide TV .
He spends the bulk of his address touting the wonderful accomplishments of his administration in fixing the economy, restoring America’s military, bolstering foreign policy. (Gee, isn’t it suppose to be about the kids??)
Then he goes on to exhort the students to help make America strong by
1. studying hard (good)
2. being good citizens (wonderful)
3. staying away from drugs. (excellent)
4. and lowering the tax rates (Huh???)
Why he just couldn’t help himself slip his political agenda in there again.
http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1986/51386d.htm
in Oct. 1991 HW Bush senior looked into the TV camera from a classroom
“Write me a letter — and I’m serious about this one — write me a letter about ways you can help us achieve our goals. I think you know the address.”
Is the speech compulsory or are schools and classes given latitude to either show it or not? I would be willing to bet the latter, but that its use will be widespread if for no other reason that it is easy*.
*prepared lesson plan with a long video and largely subjective responses that will most likely be graded primarily on participation.
Last I looked our nation’s school districts were run by their local school boards, not the feds, and any attempt by the federal government to make airing such speeches “compulsory” would be quite rightly met with a resounding “F*** OFF” by a hge proportion of said boards, not to mention the reaction in Congress. Or at least PARTS of Congress. What individual schools and classes may opt to do is largely up to their administrators and school boards.
The speech itself (and I have read both the originbal and amended versions) is largely innocuous, and will IMHO fail to achieve its goal of boosting the President’s poll ratings. If the objective is to inspire kids to be better educated, it will fail by the simple metric of boring them into inattention in very short order.