Patriotism or Indoctrination – you decide.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aqMTD5UF...

So what was the "danger" again? Maybe that we would completely forget the Republicans?

"If I feel the sky is too blue I have a right to protest its brightness or its dullness."...This is just speculation, but I bet you have some really good sign-holding children. Dumb as rocks, because you keep them out of PUBLIC SCHOOLS as a protest, but they can hold a sign like nobody's business. Great job, by the way.

vatoloco, I can't help but add that even if Obama's approval rating is sliding, it would be hard to be even worse than GW Bush's approval rating. Not that I wish that on anyone, but if you really were to stop and think about your comment before you clicked on "post comment" you would have had to realize just how silly your comment was. right? But I'm not going to ask you to confirm that you voted for Bush, because I really don't care.

um...vatoloco, what gives you any right to imply that I voted for Obama? In America, we are ALSO given the right to not divulge who we voted for. I am merely stating the fact that PRESIDENT OBAMA gave a speech directed to school age children. Which, by all accounts, is not unheard of from the Office of the President, nor is it socialist or nazist, but rather an encouraging message from our President giving a little bit of advice to students on how to be responsible citizens! HEAVEN FORBID anyone tells our kids to be responsible citizens!!!

Apparently no one teaches kids ANYTHING about responsibility, anymore! If we don't want to do something, we organize some crazy demonstration, put a fancy name on it and declare it our "right" to not do it. nee nee boo boo.

I hope all of your tears won't water down your milk too much...but you probably would cry over your spilled milk, too, after you threw a tantrum and threw it on the floor.

Some people just don't get what being an American really means...or what you really should be doing as a responsible citizen of the free land known as the United States of America.

RUSerious: You said "SuperDave--what Zoom said. That's what I was asking; for you to verify. That there was a previous speech with sinister intent.You keep saying it, but we have not seen that admitted to".
THEN, you said: "I was NOT quoting you, nor did I say I was, when I spoke of this non-existent alternate speech being sinister".
So I suppose technically you are correct, you weren't quoting me, you were just saying what I said.
This whole thread is getting tiresome, I've already made my points. Good day all.

So what was the message that was so dangerous to children?

hillsvalleys is there a reason you are avoiding answering questions?

superdave - nine posts from midnight to 9pm today to defend a defenseless position. Is that a new record for you?

common sense slowly returning to schools

http://www.jsonline.com/newswatch/594721...

I was NOT quoting you, nor did I say I was, when I spoke of this non-existent alternate speech being sinister. I was getting that implication from those who insist that there was another speech that had to be abandoned because the country was "on to him" and would not tolerate this indoctrination of the nation's children. (A very sinister scenario, is it not?) WHY ELSE would (you imply) they change the speech at the last minute? (Which they did not.) The lesson plan at the end was changed as has been previously stated. Neither lesson question, however, the original nor the replacement, were unique to this president or suspicious in nature-or do you think they were? How? I am only asking you to show verification that they changed the speech itself. If you can find it from a reputable source, I will acknowledge that and aplogize But you say (or imply) that they can't admit it. Does that make it true by default?
Now-you wondered where you said, even once, that they backed out of the original speech. How about:
"they changed the content to the non-controversial speech that was actually delivered. I wish we could have all read the original version..."
"Um...why do you suppose they changed the speech?"
"...but I would have loved to see the original version (which was changed when the word got out)."
Exactly WHAT are you implying then, Dave?
Now, if I may, I AM going to quote you and pass your words right back to you:
"What is so hard to understand about all of this?" "Again, if you're going to comment on my posts, please read them first."

RUSerious: You said (that I said) "there was a previous speech with sinister intent.You keep saying it, but we have not seen that admitted to". Well BIG DUH. First of all, where did I say there was a previous speech with "sinister intent", to use YOUR words? Secondly, where did I "KEEP SAYING IT", to use your words again. Where did I say that even once???? Are you serious? Third, (and again), we do not know what the original speech was because the Obama administration has not released it. What is so hard to understand about all of this? And lastly, why would they ADMIT to it? C'mon, use just a smidgen of common sense...
Again, if you're going to comment on my posts, please read them first. Don't go into defensive mode "he must mean such & such". Read. Understand. Reply.

whythink: please elaborate. Mentioning Stalin and Hitler, these are historical figures that you might not remember. Please reference an actual quote if you have a question. It was Nancy Pelosi who first used the term "Nazi" to refer to those involved in the tea parties and so-called townhall meetings. Socialism/Communism are very real - if we are to head down that path it is imperative that at the very least we recognize it! That doesn't make it SCARE TACTICS, that makes it a very real concern! Do you want to live under either one? (or more likely, both).
Death panels - words not used (duh) in any of the legislation, this term was coined (I think) by Sarah Palin to describe what will happen if the house bill ever sees the light of day.
Lastly, please leave your veiled expletives at the door, f-bombs do not belong on this forum.
Thank you.

SuperDave--what Zoom said. That's what I was asking; for you to verify. That there was a previous speech with sinister intent.You keep saying it, but we have not seen that admitted to.
You said:"The reason I cut and paste is so that I can use the exact words out of the article..." But didn't you leave out some very important words when you quoted "...it was political and urged parents nationwide to keep their children at home Tuesday if their schools would be showing the speech." ? You left out that the article stated that "right wing pundits" referred to the speech as political. It makes a BIG difference. If you didn't agree with that quote about the speech being political, then I apologize for misunderstanding your reason for your incomplete cut and paste. But it seems you do agree.
As far as capitalizing each letter of the title PRESIDENT(OTUS)-each person is entitled to his own degree of reverence for the office and the person in it. You, for example, didn't even use the term "President" when referring to him. Do you have anything to fear because of that? And now to your own moniker: SuperDave. You said it was because of your friends' respect for you-that's great-but we (or at least I) had no way of knowing its' meaning so you shouldn't be surprised it might sound braggy to some. Now I know where it comes from.
I agree about youth, the merits of service, the perspective of different walks of life, especially in service. But there are many types of service (granted-they don't all call for us to put our lives on the line, and for that you have my admiration), but many DO see and try to alleviate the less glamorous, the downright miserable, existence that some people must live, and it isn't always because of lack of ambition that people find themselves there. People right here in the US (as well as your probable exposure to sad existences overseas) are barely existing, even dying because of their lack of access to food, medical care, housing. Just please don't discount other people's views and efforts because they didn't serve overseas. Just like you and your nickname here, they might have other stories that you would never understand without explanation.

His ten minutes speaking directly to republican children would have turned a significant number of them into socialist athiests.
.
This danger (thus the word "safety" in the title)was removed fromt he orginal speech and instead he just told them to stay in school and work hard.

Zoom, I was not trying to be a smart ---, I was reading the posts and it sounds like there was another speech I just wanted to know where it was and how it changed. Maybe someone here had it I just want to see the difference.

"But they initially kept the content a secret, then when people started to ask questions, they changed the content to the non-controversial speech that was actually delivered. I wish we could have all read the original version, but now we're just left to wonder what, why, who?"

You just contradicted yourself. If we didn't read an "original" speech, how does anyone know it changed? Your lemmingness is astounding.

No other President has even offered to provide his education speech to the children before hand. The last major objection to a Presidential speech was during the G.H.W. Bush (Bush 1) presidency, and that was AFTER the speech was given. You're asking for a double standard, because somehow you think a 15 minute speech to school children, in front of their teachers, will somehow corrupt them. Or, you're a lemming that believes whatever Rush, Hannity, or Coulter tells you.

More lies from the right. The content was never "secret". The speech was never changed. Neither you, nor anyone else, has provided proof that the speech changed, yet you continue to beleive those mainstream media/entertainment people that spread lies. Please continue though. The more you right wing nuts keep lying, the more ridiculous you appear.

One more thing...my name. Friends have called me that for many years. I initially hated it (how do you live up to superhero status?), but eventually embraced it. Those that know me well (in the real world) still call me SuperDave, casual acquaintances and professional contacts do not. So, I didn't come up with the name, but since it was given to me I now use it in forums of this type. Full of myself? If you knew me you'd know how laughable that is. I'm probably the most down-to-earth person you could ever meet. Have a great day.

My questions is a few of you are saying that the speech should of been previewed and that is was re-written. Who had the original speech? Is there a copy that I can read of the original speech? I would like to see the changes made.

RUSerious: You're welcome! Ms. Sassy used all caps apparently to emphasize the fact that Mr. Obama is now president. My previous comments covered all that, I won't repeat it again for you.
The reason I cut and paste is so that I can use the exact words out of the article or someone's comments rather than paraphrasing. Cut and paste is obviously selective - that's the whole point. I can't believe you are attempting to criticize me for using someone's exact words in my comments, nothing could be fairer than that. If you think I am leaving out relevant parts, then by all means show me.
The captive media are only reporting the change from "help the President" to "help yourselves" - they are not reporting the complete, original text. Why is that????? Obviously I cannot tell you or anyone else how the speech was changed when the original version is being kept a secret by the self-titled most transparent administration in history. At this point, were they to produce the "original", that now would be suspect because so much time has elapsed.
I've already covered the issue of the "threats", please see my previous posts. You're right, I don't know that all the callers were parents (no one does), although the first line of the article says "Schulte said threats from parents...", whoops, sorry there's that darn old cut and paste again LOL.
The reason I mention my service, and that of RAF. I think veterans in general have a different perspective than those who did not serve. Here's an analogy - when you work your tail off to support and provide for your family, sometimes it gets irritating when the kids take their lifestyle for granted - you simply want them to understand and appreciate what it is that they have. So it is with liberty. Those that have lived fat and happy in the United States all their life often have no idea that our lives are vastly different than most of the occupants of this planet. And while they understand conceptually that someone else has sacrificed to ensure the freedom of the country, they don't truly understand and in fact take it all for granted because that's all they know. Hope that helps.

Hi Sarah! Good to hear from you. You are correct. We need to either decide that the office of the president deserves respect, or it does not. That being said, while maintaining a heathly respect for the office, we may or may not respect the occupant of the office. My whole point is that those who bashed Bush for eight years cannot now say that Mr. Obama deserves our total respect and reverence, just because he is president. That is obviously hypocritical. This article was about the presidential speech to school children. And again, while maintaining respect for the office, parents still have the absolute right to determine what their children are exposed to. The administration should have published the text of the speech in a timely manner and none of this controversy would have happened. But they initially kept the content a secret, then when people started to ask questions, they changed the content to the non-controversial speech that was actually delivered. I wish we could have all read the original version, but now we're just left to wonder what, why, who? Too bad, Mr. Obama missed another opportunity for transparency.

I am completely ashamed to have most of you as fellow Americans and scared to know most are parents! I work in the school system and how sad that what we try to teach the children everyday is being sabotaged!!!

Say every one WPR is now broadcasting a form on health care. You can listen here. www.wpr.org/webcasting/live.cfm And participate by phone or email. They have a large panel from the insurance industry to state legislators. RAmen

Yea but Bush sucked and Obama is a real President.

SuperDave, (My, aren't we full of ourselves with that name-and you berate someone for capitalizing the entire title of the President?):

Anyway, you have criticized three people in a row on how they structured comments, how they read on an article on which they commented, and how the article itself was titled. (while you apparently selectively cut and paste a line to give it a different slant) Why do you attack mechanics of the comments? Because the content was at least as logical and accurate as anything you had to say. As for my own comment about the slight change in wording of the exercise following the speech: it is apparent that the wording was changed from : "help the President" to "help yourselves" because people used the former phrase as a way of claiming something sinister was being asked. You did notice the uproar about the intent to televise the President's speech, right? Now, please show me how the content of the body of the speech, and the entire intent of the message, was changed. This is NOT a rhetorical request.

In my post that you said was hard to understand I also included a phrase from a televised speech from a former President to show that those same words didn't used to be considered sinister. If that part of my comment was confusing, I'm sorry.

As for someone showing you how students were threatened: that is up to the person who made that claim. It is up to Superintendent Karen Schulte to divulge that information. How are the readers supposed to know what those "veiled threats" were? Should we take the claims lightly because we don't know exactly what they are? And how do you know they were all made by parents? We just know that they were presumably made; veiled threats were IN ADDITION to keeping kids home from school or picketing.
You claim to have fought for (our) right to speak. Thank you. I've seen that comment made before when a person disagrees with another. Don't use that as part of your argument as if it an automatic "50 points". Then I can TRULY appreciate your efforts on behalf of your fellow citizens. Does that sound harsh? It isn't meant to be. You have no idea the depths of my respect for those who are brave enough to fight for my freedom, safety and country. We usually never know who they are. They often pass by us without introduction. More acclaim is needed for what they do without expectation of reward. But you sounded like you were "rubbing someone's nose in it" with your comment "we have both defended your right to spout off in this forum. So have a ball - but try to make a little sense." Why?

hillsvalleys: Regarding your angry diatribe of Sep 15, 2009 at 5:39 p.m., I won't speak for RAF, he can speak for himself. I will say that we are both veterans, and we have both defended your right to spout off in this forum. So have a ball - but try to make a little sense. Again, where is the threat to student safety - from their own parents????

hillsvalleys: You have to read more than just the (inaccurate) title of the article. Read the whole article. You keep reacting to the title, if you wish to be taken seriously it's your obligation to read the whole article, not just the title! Show me where student safety was threatened, and by parents no less! Really!

ms_sassy_wi: it is SO FUNNY to read your words in ALL CAPS that Mr. Obama is the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES LOL OMG!!!!! Why does this office all of a sudden deserve this intense reverence (according to you), after the way the LAST PRESIDENT OF THE UNTIED STATES was treated? Remember "na na na na, na na na na, HEY HEY, GOODBYE"??? This was to a sitting PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, on the occasion of the peaceful transition of power to the NEW GUY (Mr. Obama). Give me a break. And fix your caps lock key, it is obviously stuck.

RUSerious: Thanks for making my point (at least the part of your post that is understandable).
Namely "All I've seen verified was 'confirmed with the White House that the exercise calling for students to 'write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president' WAS AMENDED" (my emphasis).
Um...why do you suppose they changed the speech?

Well, at least my Intrade contracts are looking tasty!
I figured the support for this would fall off a cliff. Congress would screw up a one car funeral if you let them! No one believes this will actually happen now. The market for this passing with a public option by years end has dropped 17 points in just a few weeks....
.
http://data.intrade.com/graphing/jsp/clo...
.
I think I'll cash in my 200+% gains tomorrow morning!. This stuff is to freaking easy! haha

The right wing "nut jobs" can't do a thing to stop this. the Democrats have massive, filibuster proof, majorities in both houses. It's laughable to hear that anyone on the right is holding this up. You have the votes; ram rod the thing through! My God are the ones promoting this are a bunch of cry babies. You won the election. America clearly wanted "hope and change" in the form of a massive governmnet agenda. So what are you waiting for? RAM ROD THE THING THROUGH!! Good grief; who cares what the public wants? Never has stopped any recent legislation..TARP, Stimulus, Auto bailouts...Public was also against those in huge majorities, and it was all passed gleefully...So pass this thing to..Who cares at this point? The country is all ready screwed. Might as well sink the ship as quick as possible.

Anytime Obama gives a speach they begrudgingly agree with, right wing nut jobs will now simply say he changed it from an earlier, more (socialist, or place your favorite anti-american political system here) version. I'm in awe of the feer Obama has struck in the conservative nut jobs, and in the short period of time it has taken.

So, we don't have to respect the president, then do our kids have to respect their principals? I mean what if they don't agree with them? I mean they didn't elect their principals so why should they have to? What if they teach them something that is against my parenting values?? THAT is the example we have set!

As far as the rest of this name calling dribble about who is smarter than who and why is leaving your kid at home a treat. Well if the school is trying to warp the mind of a child then I certainly believe that its the parents right to choose not the schools about what ideology (political or otherwise) that our kids are exposed to. If the school does not like it then too bad for them. I for one would have loved to see the first speach. He played it well pulling it and delivering his second speach. Now he comes off like the good guy not the guy he is. I find that absolutely ridiculous. What speach shall he deliver on the health care front now. It ought to create havoc. Now that they are forcing health care on the repulicans without a bipartisan deal. Sure Obama work both sides it is just laughable.

So sorry i missed this little swaray. First and foremost, if we can not say the pledge in school, nor can we acknowledge religious holidays i.e. winter break was x-mas break, nor can we use the "in god we trust" anylonger, then I certainly do not think that this person some of you may call your president, is not nor should be allowed to speak to the children in a classroom setting. Put it on TV at 7:00 and allow the parents to decide if he is okay to allow are children to watch. Personally I would not allow my kids to see this "president". I think its a cheap way to bend the minds of our youth into a "democratic way of thinking" Your president is a socialist and I do not believe in his form of goverment. Look at what the great Ronald regan has said about his type of poitics and agenda. Now for those of you who have drank the kool-aid and want to twist the minds of our youth then that is your choice and I respect your right to choose(while you still have it)

Hillsvalley if you are done pontificating irrelevant points please answer my earlier question to you. How is a parent’s decision to leave their child home a threat to the school?

superdave and retired airforce guy....it seems the two of you spend your day blogging on numerous gazette stories with the same agenda setting point of view and pay little attention to the actual stories. It's like listening to a broken record. It also seems that the two of you don't have kids in the school system and don't care about what school employees and parents have to deal with today. It also seems that the two of you are taking up space and are alone in your strange world of twisting the story to fit your agenda and point of view of the world. But maybe you should take a deep breath and think....Maybe those of us (the vast majority of the folks who have entered in this blog) who disagree with the two of you and a couple of others know of what veiled and real threats can mean, maybe some of us have had family, co-workers or friends hurt or killed. Maybe some of us have had to work with or counsel those who are so angry you just know they are ready to explode for the wrong reasons. Maybe some of us are tired of reading the papers and watching the news when there is an attack on a school and listen to the interviews of friends and neighbors wonder to the cameras about how they can't beleive it could happen in their nice little town and how they ignored the signs of trouble. So maybe, you should take a breath, take the blinders off and approach the story for what it is.

Maybe instead of blogging all day you could try bowling your frustrations away. It works for me. I hear leagues are forming now.

"Student safety trumped Obama speech"

RAF/superdave translation

"Nothing of the sort happened."

I said you may not agree with him. I get the idea that there is some sort of obligation to listen to him, because HE IS THE PRESIDENT. I never said you have to love the man or woman who is in the OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT...but as an American citizen there are responsibilities, too. One of those is to show the President proper respect.

But people today do not understand the concept of showing respect. It's all about "me" and what "I" want and deserve. This country IS going to hell in a handbasket and we have no one but ourselves to blame for the state of disarray.

yeah, the superintendent was fearful enough about the safety of the students...that, to me, doesn't sound like peaceful assembly.

Again, I don't see anything that shows she asked the question: "or what? What will you do if we show the speech by the President of the United States in the PUBLIC SCHOOL?"

Remove the politics: IT IS THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES! The entire nation has the right, and dare I say obligation, to listen to him when he speaks! We may not agree with him all the time, but we still need to focus on the future of the country instead of ourselves for a change! Unless you are all so narcissistic that you think the world (or this country) revolves around you...

RAF, keeping your child home is not a threat, but calling the school and threatening the safety of the school or students if they show it is NOT peaceful.

SuperDave...didn't your cut/paste also cut out the words RIGHT-WING PUNDITS....said it was political and urged parents nationwide to keep their children at home. And others? Just who were the others? And that, obviously, is good enough for you.
And your apparently first hand knowledge about the speech: "(which was changed when the word got out)."...funny but I've never seen this verified. Can you prove it? I mean, really prove it? All I've seen verified was "confirmed with the White House that the exercise calling for students to "write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president" was amended; it now suggests that students "write letters to themselves about how they can achieve their short‐term and long‐term education goals." The originally intended exercise was very similar to "President George H.W. Bush ... in 1991, when his address to an eighth-grade class at Alice Deal Junior High in Washington, D.C., was broadcast nationwide. The administration sent letters to all public schools urging them to watch the speech, which ended with Bush encouraging students to "write me a letter about ways you can help us achieve our goals."
Also, prounion, although (or because?) you and I seem to agree on this particular issue, I wish you'd leave my religion out of it. As a matter of fact, my fellow parishioners and I, in casual conversations, discussed this gross over-reaction, "jump on the misguided bandwagon" kind of response to one man's message to school children. It was televised! What could he possibly have said without detection?

I see that prounion is on step #3. LOL!!!

hillsvalleys: Not only did I read the headline, I read the whole article. You should also. This has already been quoted directly from the article, but just in case you missed it, here it is again: "...it was political and urged parents nationwide to keep their children at home Tuesday if their schools would be showing the speech. Schulte said district officials heard from parents who threatened to do just that. A few other callers threatened to picket, and there were 'veiled threats' along the lines of 'you'd better not,' Schulte said.
So the threats were (I love doing this for people that have a hard time understanding the article...just too many darned words for ya I guess LOL)...
LIST OF THREATS
1. "keep their children at home Tuesday"
2. "picket" this threat coming from a "few other callers"
3. "'veiled threats' along the lines of 'you'd better not,'"
Gee, when people say "you'd better not" to me, I sure shake in my boots. In fact I'm looking over my shoulder right now. Give me a break.
Yes, some parents were upset. If I had kids in school I too would have called, and bottom line if they intended to show it to everyone (no choice given), I would have simply kept them home that day. Parents are ultimately responsible for what their kids are exposed to. The actual speech turned out to be really innocuous, but I would have loved to see the original version (which was changed when the word got out).
Back to work, have a great day.

Pro as you are upset, evident by your postings, which of your two categories do you fall in?

How is a parents decision to leave a child home a threat? How is this not peaceful?

RAF, have you ever heard of PEACEFULLY? Threats are not peaceful, they are bullying behavior. Not impressed.

The people that were upset about this seem to fall into two camps:
1. People that realize that their ideas (religion, republican) are so frail that if a kid is exposed to a different idea they might come to a different and more logical conclusion about reality.
2. People that are just easily led by Fox and Rush as pawns in a feeble attempt to devalue the office of the president in an attempt to erode his power so that he doesn't do things that take away from large corporations.

The headline DOES say SAFETY though! SO, if you REALLY think about it, they had to make a decision because PARENTS didn't make them feel it was SAFE to show the speech! So, whether it was threats or not, it was something and enough to make them feel it wouldn't be a safe for our children! THAT is HORRIBLE and they ought to be ashamed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

sassy, if you notice no body is listening to anything we have said. Its sad how consumed people get about the whole political thing. While we are trying to point out something that has NOTHING to do with politics they are acting like 2 buff men in a wrestling ring comparing who is "bigger"! Here, I'll stoop....
HELLO PEOPLE!!!!!!!! Who gives a rats A@* if you agree with Obama!! HE is the PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES!! WE are talking about a message to stay in school and do right by yourself!! We all talk about our kids being into drugs, violence, etc...well these kinds of things influence those things!!!!!!! And to the parents who say,"my child would never"....well you are teaching them they are above others which is another HUGE problem(if not one of the worst imo)!!! When a child has no consistancy in the messages they receive about right and wrong they get confused, angry, and act out!!! One minute we teach them being a good person is what matters, then they see society worry about who's got the best of everything, fight like spoiled children,etc. We tell them drugs are wrong, but then how many parents drink like fish and drive and much more? We tell them to be patriotic while we watch our leaders take from the hungry and worry about who's out to get us instead of helping our fellow man!? If everyone got off the Bush vs. Obama thing and saw what really needs to be seen just MAYBE our country would have a chance!? Until then WE are our OWN worst enemies!!!!!!

Now let's see how many just pass over my point and go back into "you can't cry because I am bashing Obama, you did it to Bush" NONSENSE!!!!!!

superdave - are you reading the headline of the story or making up your own.

Here is an idea - call the schools ask them? Maybe they'll tell you - "no there were no threats we just made that up because we are in agreement with Superdave and all his arguments"

There has been way too many attacks within schools in nice little communiities to not pay attention to the threat. That is what created the story and why the super made the decision.

hillsvalleys: You said "superdave - so threatening schools is not fear tactics"? To answer that, I would need to know what the threats were. Looks to me like the main threat was to keep the kids home for a day. Big whoop.
My whole point is that calling something FEAR TACTICS is a big fat red herring. And if you don't know what that means, it a distraction used to avoid the issues. Just like racism is used. How much racism have you seen since Mr. Obama took office? I have seen zero - zip, nada, cero, 0.0. What I HAVE seen is anyone who opposes anything Mr. Obama does or says, being labelled "racist", which is just ridiculous and sad. But it's not working, because it's so laughable. So now, when people bring up their objections to Socialized Medicine (or any other Obama takeover) they are accused of using FEAR TACTICS. Pretty pathetic that Obama supporters can't just have a polite conversation and debate about the issues, they immediately turn to the slash and burn, Chicago-style politics.
So to all Socialists, here's an outline for you. If someone objects to Obama in any way, shape or form, do NOT address the actual content of what they say, since you will very likely lose the debate on the merits of your argument. Take these steps -
1. Accuse them of being racist. Then, when THAT doesn't work...
2. Accuse them of using FEAR TACTICS. Then, when THAT doesn't work...
3. Accuse them of getting all their information from Fox News, Limbaugh, Beck...yada yada yada.
4. Repeat steps 1 thru 3.

Since when is picketing a threat? Since they never explained the "veiled threat" is it relevant? Was the veiled threat they will not be liked anymore...yes stupid, but no less so then "veiled threat".

RAF, you're ignoring the "veiled threats" and possible picketing disruptions mentioned in the article. While I don't agree with Schulte's ultimate decision to require permission slips, I also wasn't on the receiving end of those phone calls.

hillsvalleys, I see you did not provide any comments/facts/proof/relevance to show that a parents choice to leave their child home is a threat to the school, thus supporting my contention of it being a non-issue.

‘ms_sassy_wi, have you ever heard of the right to petition? As American’s, it is their right to call, complain, letter write, get signatures, oppose, assemble, lobby, and take any legal action they wish if they disagree…just as you do. Or you can take your own advise and just hold your breath a while.

retired airforce - non-issue? fabulous - thanks - this blog needed a good laugh and we finally got it.

That should be tomorrow's new headline for the paper

"The prospect of the president speaking directly to children enflamed right-wing pundits and others, who said it was political and urged parents nationwide to keep their children at home Tuesday if their schools would be showing the speech.

Schulte said district officials heard from parents who threatened to do just that. A few other callers threatened to picket, and there were "veiled threats" along the lines of "you'd better not," Schulte said."

Or else...what? Did she ask the questions? I think it was a cowardly, knee-jerk response that reinforces to kids that "we don't have to, you can't make us, and I'll tell my Mommy and Daddy and they'll hire an attorney and you will get in t-r-o-u-b-l-e" Do we really need more of that?

Seriously, what do you think the President of the United States could say to your precious darling that would make a negative impression more than you (the parents) throwing a fit like a 2-year old? I have an idea...if you don't like the President of the United States, hold your breath till you die. OR until someone else is elected, whichever comes first.

vatoloco said: "Zoom, many of the things Obama is doing right now can be deemed as trying to control every aspect of human activity."

Please, enumerate these "many things.

vatoloco said: "I asked what is your infatuation with big government."

Dude/Dudette, reread your question. You made no mention of big government. Stop listening to the voices in your head.

Hillsvalley, the reason I never commented on your retort on threatening schools, it is a non-issue; my response was to Red’s comments before yours.

To directly address yours and hers (Schulte) idea of threats, let’s look at it. Some parents called the schools and said they would keep their children home for the day; where in this is a threat? Whose child is it, the school or the parent’s? Since when is a parents choice not to send a child to school a threat? Are the same school officials and you now declaring parents that home school or enroll their children in private school “threatening” the school?

Regardless of the speech, the decision, when to allow or not allow a child to attend school is a parental choice and not a threat. As for my stance on the subject of the speech and how it was handled, by both sides, feel free to read my prior comments.

But back to the topic...bullying is ugly. Do we really want to be the "ugly" nation? I thought that was what we were at war in other countries to stop...silly me...

"Later on no one wishes to admit that they were ever a believer."...sorry, vatoloco, but that sounds like George W. Bush supporters.

BTW: I think it's really sad that so many are wondering what is so special about The Constitution. (Yes, I've had my frustrations with government, too.) We take the First Ammendment for granted, don't we?

superdave - so threatening schools is not fear tactics?

whythink: Why do you think it is that people who you know, respect, and are intelligent, for some crazy reason "are willing to follow the fear tactics of the right"????
These are NOT FEAR TACTICS. If anyone is using FEAR TACTICS, it is certainly not the conservatives. No, this is what many hard-working, thinking, intelligent people actually believe. And they believe it for a reason. They are not turning off their brains and going along with some company line broadcast by the alternative media; rather, they are using their brains and refusing to accept the company line being broadcast by the current administration and the captive media.
So people, stop saying that everyone else is allowing themselves to be swayed by FEAR TACTICS, and only the enlightened left-leaning few truly understand what's really happening here, you've got it completely backwards.
If you have something to add to the debate, other than accusing those with whom you disagree to be falling for FEAR TACTICS, then by all means say so. Otherwise, give it up. Accusing anyone of falling for FEAR TACTICS is right up there with saying that if you disagree with Obama you are racist. I don't recall anyone saying that if you disagreed with Bush you are racist, so why is that suddenly an issue now? It's NOT. It's just another tired old way of trying to shift the debate from the issues.

packfan66
.
"Bottom line is this: Right wingers had no problems with Ford spoke to students, when Reagan did it or when either of the Bushes did it. The problem is a Democrat is doing it and, as has been proven for some time now, the Republicans don't like to be fair."
.
In addition, they have Fox News, Beck, Limbaugh and Hannity pushing this crap and for some reason many (people I know and respect and are intelligent) fall right in line. They make the calls, scream at the Town Halls and spread the fear of Socialism.
.
I don't understand it. The nut jobs on the left don't have nearly the following. Mike Malloy, who is similar to Limbaugh, Hannity and Beck in terms of tone, is a late night host with very few listeners. For some reason, people like and are willing to follow the fear tactics of the right.
.
I understand conservatism and can respect that belief system but the repulican party is no longer simply the conservative party, it is the party of scare tactics and is currently being run by people like Hannity, Limbaugh and Beck. That might work when it is time to disrupt a town hall but it didn't and won't work on voting day. Moderates won't fall for it.
.
You better find a message other than "Socialist", "Hitler", "Stalin", etc...
If you really want to regain power because, IMO, that message won't work.

so retiredairforce - Very interesting and complex idea about government - Now - what do you think about threats to schools? Are you repeatedly ignoring the question because you don't believe it? Do you think the Superintendent is lying? Do you realize what that would mean if she was?

To blame the problems within our government on corporations and lobbyists is the same logic used to defend a criminal; he only stole it because he was setup.

These people are “hired” to do a job. Many do a good job, their first or second term, after that they become entwined in a power machine that makes them the center of influence and not their job…term limits will solve most of the mess.

To those who support the speech not being shown and are using this thread to spread more of the same old same ol' Please read the story...and please read the speech. AND, please stay on topic.

Is it okay to threaten the schools?

That is what the headline read and that was the reason the super gave - this was not a protest this was a threat - again that is what the story said last week and that is what my student was told today.

Just because you don't want to believe it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

There was no voice of the people happening here. This is tiny frightened minority who threatens children to get their way.

If you want to continue to make a fool of yourself dragging every crybaby (to use your lingo) complaint into this conversation or joke some more, go ahead. I'm sure those looking to bring jobs to this area would love to hear what kind of "problem solving skills" their workforce has, and what kind of schools their children will be going to.

To those of you who don't have kids in school but are writing....all I can say is...I can't wait for you to have a child and have some coward threaten him or her. You'll know what mad is then.

“What is so great about the government?”

Nothing, vatoloco except that the same system of government created by those who formed our Republic and wrote our constitution still provides the basis for the freedoms we enjoy today. Even though events they could never have imagined 200 years ago have occurred, this same document continues to effectively guide our country today. To quote James Madison:
"As there is a degree of depravity in mankind which requires a certain degree of circumspection and distrust: So there are other qualities in human nature, which justify a certain portion of esteem and confidence. Republican government (that of a Republic) presupposes the existence of these qualities in a higher degree than any other form. Were the pictures which have been drawn by the political jealousy of some among us, faithful likenesses of the human character, the inference would be that there is not sufficient virtue among men for self government; and that nothing less than the chains of despotism can restrain them from destroying and devouring one another."

The Government is NOT inherently evil and neither are political parties. What has changed, is our perception of the Government and the role it plays. Our government has been overrun by Corporations and lobbyists, not by socialists. Special interests have too much influence that begins from the time a candidate announces they are running for office; from local elections to national elections. Even our judicial system has been corrupted in Wisconsin by allowing special interests to promote and fund State Supreme Court candidates. Some things our government has done very well including Rural Electric Co-ops, Social Security, National Defense, Medicare and Medicaid, just to name a few. As of late the government has had far fewer successes. Our government was established for the people, by the people. If government fails it also means we have failed. To target a single political party is wrong and we need to hold accountable ALL of our elected officials. Campaign reform would be a huge first step. Take the campaign funding out of the hands of the special interests and Corporations and put it in the hands of the people. A person should not have to raise and spend BILLIONS of dollars to win a seat which pays (at most) a couple hundred thousand. The Government isn’t about Obama or Bush or you, its about all of us. Obama's success or failure will not change our government.

vatoloco,
I'll answer a serious question as soon as you ask one. The government already has a role in everyone's lives. What are you talking about?

I also watched the speech, in no way was there a political message just good advice this town and this America is going to hell in a hand basket. We cannot say the pledge of allegiance anymore we cannot pray in school. We are a country that is going down hill. I am sorry that these kids did not get to hear it. I taped it on my DVR so my grandson could hear the leader of our country speak to him. We are a very sad country, America take a good look around it will get worse. Some day we will tell our children about how we use to be able to make choices and have a dream of being a better country. How do we explain to them once we lose all our rights.

my, whoanellie, getting pretty defensive there. Funny how some people feel the need to point out they have a "right to their opinion", after being questioned about their beliefs. Nobody questioned your right to be ignorant. You aren't going to be let off the hook for comparing Obama to Hitler and Stalin. There is NO justification for comparing any U.S. President to someone who MURDERED 6 million people. My god.

By threatening Schulte with disruptions and veiled threats (per the article), those parents have effectively subjected ALL students to the individual beliefs of those parents.

andre, don't try making others think their side also said these things...after all politicians change their minds everyday about what they think based on political polls and donations, not to mention who is in the White House and who is running for office.

Book burning this saturday after the tea party anyone? We need to make sure certain ideas don't enter our children's heads.

Bottom line is this: Right wingers had no problems with Ford spoke to students, when Reagan did it or when either of the Bushes did it. The problem is a Democrat is doing it and, as has been proven for some time now, the Republicans don't like to be fair. They like to push their agenda, lying if necessary, and then lie again if they don't like what the Democrats say. It's just another example, such as Bush's weapons of mass destruction and Palin's death panels. Just a crock being used as a smokescreen to keep the left from getting anything done so they don't show up the right, which accomplished nothing in eight years but get us into a needless war and waste so many taxpayer dollars that we'll never get this country out of debt.

I know it kills, but I am my childs parent and the last word on everything that they are exposed to. I have rights as an american citizen too. My comparing obama to hitler and stalin was just that their philosophy was to get them while they are young and I believe obama IS a socialist and that is their intention. It is funny though that if someone who is a conservative voices their concerns it is called whining,but if its a left wing nut job it's valid. I see a double standard here. I don't think any parents threatened the scool district with anything like bombs, just said they would not let their kids go. How is that dangerous??? We have the right to keep them home whenever we deem necessary. Obama is our president but I as a taxpaying citizen still get to voice my opinion whether you like it or not.

"I am so sick of the left and their double speak and whining. When they do it, it is fine, when we do it they whine like little school children."

So glock, let me get this straight, when the "right" whines and uses double speak to justify their position the left whine like little school children. So how does the "right" deal with the situation? They resort to comparing the President to Hitler and Stalin, apply a few SOCIALISM or SOCIALIST tags as though its some evil form of economic or government system then claim the whole election was fraud because Obama is not a US citizen. Well as "little school children" at least the left better educated!

I am beginning to wonder how much respect people have for their own child's ability to process information and make up their own minds. Whose responsibility is that? The teachers? The boogieman? Certainly not those who call and threaten schools and those who support them.

"Mr. Obama has bailed out financial institutions..."

Obama simply continued what Buch started, remember. Unfortunately, something had to be done to prevent a total collapse of our financial system.

"He has also, in effect, nationalized most of the auto manufacturing industry."

If by "in effect" and "most", you mean owning 60% of an auto company (GM) that has less than 20% market share, then you're right. The U.S. and Canadian governments own a combined 10% of Chrysler, which means they have no control in that company at all. I didn't agree with the auto industry bailouts, but it's a lie to say the government has nationalized "most" of the auto manufacturing industry.

delavan: "get over your crying"...nice one. And ironic in that your post is probably the most whiney one in this entire thread. "slander"? This is not one tenth of what we were exposed to from the Left over the eight years GWB was in office. So those that dished it out cannot now complain that it's disrepectful or slanderous. Get over it. Or rather, get used to it!
The question of whether Mr. Obama is Socialist, Communist, or Fascist is a red herring. Sure, there are differences in political theory, but when it comes down to economics, all three are Socialist at the core.
Forget everything Mr. Obama has ever, or will ever say (not a difficult task for this writer LOL). Examine what he has done since he took office. Mr. Obama has bailed out financial institutions, both private ones and government agencies that have been mismanaged for many years. No accountability there. He has also, in effect, nationalized most of the auto manufacturing industry. He is trying very hard to incrementally nationalize the medical system, referred to as Socialized Medicine.
Clearly Mr. Obama is a Socialist. If it walks like a duck...

Whoanellie:Were you alive during Hitler and Stalin?(I was and well remember all there horriable works)You right wing republicans have to stop all the slander.Obama is our commander in chief.Good thing you was never in the military.I do not agree with all his comments ,but he was elected to be our President.So get over your crying and move on..............

Yes, good thing there are only "wing nuts" in one political party...

It wasn't a "hijack"...more like a CULTivation.

so sad that the "wing nuts" have hijacked the Republican party..

schnckstac1, thank you for your comment!

whether we are teaching kids that threats are the way out of doing something we don't want to do or not, they are obviously learning!

btw: we have the right to protest PEACEFULLY-not threaten violence or threaten schools...I wonder what will become of the student(s) who made a bomb threat at Craig, if ever apprehended. "It's ok Johnny, I know you didn't like that teacher, so you don't have to go to class anymore." real productive. idiots.

I read most of the comments, but didn't read anything about what I find ironic: that PUBLIC SCHOOLS now not only have to worry about a separation of church and state, PUBLIC SCHOOLS also have a separation of Country and State. Last I checked, we have an obligation to uphold and respect the Office of the President. This, imho, is exactly what is wrong with this country. Everyone is blaming someone else, whether it's the President, the Democrats, the Republicans, the Liberals, the Right-Wing nutjobs...instead of looking in the mirror and honestly asking themselves: Not what my country can do for me; but what can I do for my country? A little conflict resolution and fewer adults acting like spoiled teenagers would do wonders for the moral and "united" fibers of this great nation.

My kids do not attend JSD anymore, but I'm extremely disappointed that this address to the children of our country posed such a threat to the adults. The adults who ranted about how biased the speech would be should be ashamed of themselves. Differing opinions occur every single day of my life with a variety of people from a variety of walks of life. If we, as adults, never teach our children how to weigh the good and bad, defend their morals and values or how to have and discuss a differing opinion without guns, knives or fists, it won't matter WHAT the President has to say anyway, because you are hell bent on ruining your own child's future. Just don't expect my taxes to pay for the piece of work when things don't go his way and he lands in jail or prison. Nice job parenting, by the way.

Yes we all have the RIGHT to do a lot of things, BUT how about some COMMON SENSE!? The whole "MY RIGHTS" excuse is REALLY old!! We have more OBLIGATIONS to our children to teach them RESPECT and KINDNESS then anyone has a "right" to protest for no reason other then fear and hatred! The more we stand on our UNFOUNDED fears the further we all divide!!!! I have to say I am so glad I am not a child anymore! How confusing it must be with all the mixed messages WE(parents, schools, politics, etc) send to them daily! "Be kind and respect others", but hey watch me call and yell and threaten YOUR authority figures when I don't agree! It's no wonder we have so MANY angry pissed off kids nowadays!?

I don't think it helps to disparage whoanellie's parenting skills, command of history, and first amendment rights. She is doing that well enough on her own. She and the others still have not answered whether they think it's okay to make a threat to our schools and in turn, my child.
What worries me is that according to the article the school made a decision based on threats, not someone's right to protest. There is a big difference. I mean he is the President right? President + threat = ?????

"whoanellie: I thought you homeschooled your children."

LOL. Touche.

whoanellie has now compared Obama to Stalin and Hitler. Those two had OPPOSITE politcal beliefs. So, is Obama socialist, communist or fascist? Can one person be all three? Can't kooks like you pick at least one anti-Obama diatribe and stick with it?

I know that as a parent, I am thrilled that my son couldn't listen to an inspiring speech from our President encouraging him to work hard, stay in school, and respect his fellow students, because a few whacked out parents couldn't find anything better to do with their time than threaten our superintendent with protests, etc. I'd also like to thank said superintendent for bowing down to these nuts. What an excellent example to set for our students...

OJ????? Really? Wow! Love to see the lesson plan for that one.

Fact is kids learn pretty bad stuff on the playground and at the lunch table and that is where is it YOUR responsibility as a parent to correct that innapropriate behavior. What really bothers me is that When I was in sixth or seventh grade my entire school had every television tuned to O.J.'s hearing the day he got his verdict and nobody screamed about that. Judging by the adjectives used it sounds like the only reason some people don't want it heard by kids is because they don't agree with the person delivering the message. I don't really like him either but I agree with the message and think ALL kids should hear it...AN EDUCATION IS IMPORTANT; WORK HARD TO GET WHERE YOU WANT TO BE AND DON'T EXPECT ANYONE ELSE TO CARRY YOU THERE. Now was that so bad?

So you are saying it's okay to threaten the schools?

Guess what I homeschooled my children so they weren't subject to those things you talk about, so they could get an education and not indoctrination! As for respect,I do respect the office, but not necessarily the person. And speaking of respect, I'm sure you respected Bush when he was in too.

ughhh. one speech isnt going to move some kid permanently to the left. not as much as not letting your kid watch it will move them to the right.

I need to proofread better! I meant to say I can't think of something much MORE disrespectful! Whoanellie, I find your posts and comments TERRIBLY DISRESPECTFUL.

Whoanellie, You compare a speech from our President to teachers possibly showing our children how to use drugs or have sex?! I can't think of something much less disrespectful. He is our President. Respect the office! I hope you attend school with your children daily so that you can monitor everything that happens. You'd be surprised by the stuff that children hear on the playground or at lunch (not taught by the teachers). Frankly, as a parent that stuff concerns me far more! Those kids (with parents such as yourself) could be repeating the disrespectful garbage you teach them at home to MY kids!!!!

hillsvalleys: We have the right as parents and american citizens to voice our opinion and to protest if we chose. I think it's more than just a small minority of us who don't want there children indoctrinated with socialist ideas. Now it seems as though the speech wasn't of that ilk but it could have been. Stalin and Hitler both wanted the children when they were young so they could indoctrinate them with their ideas. It is my job as a parent to make sure my children only are exposed to what WE as parents want them to. I do NOT give up my rights as a tax paying american when I drop my child off at the school. By the way we pay the teachers salary and they are dependent on our tax dollars for their jobs so they should listen to us. Why didn't you call and praise them for having the presidents speech? That was your right as well, if you chose not to use that right then too bad. the people spoke!

I thought the question was about the threat made to the schools and the school deciding to break precedent and not show the President's address to kids.
In order of importance....what's worse?
A) A speech from the President of the United States to our kids
B) Threatening the school (in turn our children)
C) School system backs down
I for one will not sign a release form. To me that's saying it's okay to threaten the school. To me that says this President is being held (by this school system) to a different standard then previous Presidents.
To all those who defend not wanting the speech shown (which seems to be a tiny minority) why didn't you just keep your kids home and let the rest of us have the moment which would have come and gone without notice., except maybe to inspire some. Why did you drag your political views into the classroom in this disrespectful and possibly unlawful manner? I think some did it because they are afraid their child might ask "so why do you hate the President so much?"

As a parent and educator I can only say this was a very disappointing decision.
.
Perhaps those who are upset with this decision could cry and make threats...then what?

While I didn't vote for the President, I didn't think his speech was that bad. I truly believe though that we are the parents and we should monitor everything that our kids are exposed to as much as possible. Would we want someone in the school showing them how to have sex, take drugs or how to skip school without getting caught! NO!! I as a parent am the last word where my kids are concerned, not the school or even the president. And this is the united states and I still have the right to voice my opinion just like anyone else! Of course I don't know with this president and his cronies how long this will last. When I send my child to school I don't surrender my rights as a parent, no one should.

Oops. "(The idea that threats were made makes me feel shame for our kids.)" does not mean I feel shame about our kids. I meant that in an empathetic way. I am not ashamed of our kids. But if we raised them correctly I think they would be ashamed of the parents who threatened the distric over a SPEECH! How petty. Ya know we do have bigger problems to worry about.

Schnckstac1: I could not have said it better myself! I see all these parents who talk trash and intolerance to others and then wonder why kids are getting more and more disrespectful. A lot of you are just slinging mud at each other. This is not supposed to be us attacking each other. And I am sick and tired of people saying that just because someone disagrees with something Obama says or does that it is a racist thing. I did not vote for him but it sure did not have ANYTHING to do with the color of his skin. Oh and by the way I am not a democrat, republican, independant, or any other label you want to affix to your belief system. So do not accuse me of that either. I do agree racism is everywhere and that some people are going to complain just because he is not white but not everyone is doing it; generalizing is a type of stereotyping so that makes it hypocritical to even say that. I do agree that there should be notification if someone-anyone other than the school-is going to directly address my kids but that doesn't mean I am going to stop my children from hearing the messsage. (The idea that threats were made makes me feel shame for our kids.) Just send me a note home letting me know what is going on I don't need a permission slip though. He is the President but that does not give him special rights to anything with my kids unless he is going to do the raising and paying for them; but I would not call the school and threaten anyone. On the other hand though I doubt his plan was to "brainwash" the kids into some "immoral" or unjust way of thinking. It is true that unfortunately some kids do have to be told how important an education and some hard work is because some kids just don't have anyone around them to model that. Sad but true. So let's focus on educating our kids and SHOWING them how to treat each other rather than us personally attacking each other and showing them just what not to do. "If it comes easy it is all too often not worth having."

fmrjvlres: I didn't say "race doesn't matter". I said "The race card doesn't work anymore, at least not with me. It's 2009, the country has a black president. Get over it. No one I know really could give a care one way or the other as to the race of the man. You're way off-base".
If you're going to respond to some one, please read and try to comprehend what they said, before you respond.
But since you brought it up, does race matter? ABSOLUTELY. To SOME people. And probably always will. You can Google almost any obscure thing and find people who are passionate about it, one way or the other. With the election of a black president, we have passed the hurdle of demonstrating that the majority of people DO NOT CARE about the race of a person. We are becoming the color-blind society envisioned by MLK. Why do you wish to dwell in the past? Let's move on.

Threats from parents!?! So the school has to protect the children from the parents? I agree that folding under pressure is NOT the job of superintendent! Get a backbone or get out. The President of the United States speaking to the children should not require a permission slip! I also saw the Reagan shooting coverage at school and the first launch of the space shuttle and both of those things have stayed with me to this day. Seeing the President speak TO YOU while at school should have been an honor for our children that could have inspired them to do well, instead they learn that threatening the school works! Great job!

yup. and i thought stoners were the ones who were suppose to be paranoid??

It's obvious that the pettiness and paranoia displayed here is being passed on to the next generation...sad.

Isn't it funny we teach our kids to be kind and respectful, but we cannot? He is the PRESIDENT, how could his words hurt our children? I'm sure his message had to be approved by MANY! Our kids are going to hear ALL SORTS of things in their lives that we might not agree with, that would be our job to teach them right from wrong and not to follow the irresponsible. So, to the parents who called, did you think he was going to brainwash your kids? Our is it really about the whole CONTROL thing? "nobody better step on my toes as a parent"?? I FIRMLY believe it takes a village to raise a child, and if we trust the Teachers with our kids EVERYDAY, shouldn't we trust they wouldn't let them watch something if it wasn't appropriate? As for the high schoolers, well geez WHAT IF they have an opinion for themselves?? Following the HATE and NASTINESS of the parents who called is NOT something we need for this country! Enough kids fight over NOTHING, lets maybe start being an EXAMPLE for them!?

My 10 year old came home the other day and said "mom, I treat people how they want to be treated, but they don't, WHY?" I had to explain that some parents DO NOT raise their kids that way and to be nice anyway!!! Pretty sad if you ask me!!!!!!!!!!!!

The speech was available on-line the day before it was aired! Anyone could have read it, so it was available for review. And if you decided you didn’t like it you could have kept your kid at home. Plain and simple, the speech should have been shown in school it was to encourage children to stay in school and work hard after all. Pathetic, give in because some parents wine.

Zoom; he can say it all he wants - his actions speak louder than words & apparently you dont see that.
***
vatoloco; your kidding right - the 2012 campaign began Nov 5th & he's educated enough to know that if you repeat the same crap over & over eventually enough people will believe you - unfortunately when the truth comes out I fear it will be too late.

"Its also comical that the herd will believe whatever he says."

Yes, I sure don't want children believing personal responsibility and hard work can lead to success.

Good for you. Unfortunately, a lot of children need exactly that. What is the harm in encouraging personal responsibility and hard work again? I'm having a hard time understanding what you're arguing against. Or are you letting your personal dislike for this particular President get in the way of a commen sense message?

Zoom; That is ironic isnt it? Its also comical that the herd will believe whatever he says. Look at the hypocrisy in what he says vs. what he does, stands for & wants for this country. All these social programs, bailouts & political appointees have nothing to do with personal responsibility but rather dependency.

"...a little personal responsibility would change this whole country."

How ironic. That's effectively what the President said in his speach.

.... it is not the government's job to tell our children to be successful. It is both my inherent obligation and responsiblity to make sure my child is successful in school.
***
Thank You! We need MORE parents like this - a little personal responsibility would change this whole country.

"I felt the speech was very important, but I think that safety trumps that," Schulte said.

This statement by Schulte is disturbing. So basically we're willing to give up our freedom of speech to stay safe. Think of all the people in history who have made a difference by taking the safe route...nobody. If she is referring to the safety of her kids, then Janesville has to be the most pathetic place on Earth apart from Afghanistan.

...hearing a positive message...

"It's been said that parents have no right to approve public school text books and therefore, by implication, curriculum."

billnewbie, nobody said parents don't have a right to approve text books, curriculum, etc. The parents that complained about Obama's speech probably haven't given a second thoughtabout what their children are taught on a day to day basis. They don't go and ask teachers what their lesson plan is for the day, but they think a 15 minute speach by the President will somehow "indoctrinate" their children. They're hypocrits, and hurting those children who really should be heating a positive message from the President.

glock, I'm still waiting for the proof that Obama changed his speech. You seem to have a weak grasp of the difference between fact and speculation.

I actually read the Dept. of Education lesson plans, before and after the change, instead of relying on Faux News for my thoughts.

billnewbie complains about the Democratic hearings for Bush 1, yet is disappointed that hearings won't be held over Obamas speech. How is the current Congress being partisan over this issue if the Bush 1 hearings were wrong (which they were)? Now you right wingers are left with complaining about something that happened 18 years ago. Keep grasping at straws.

Also, the content of Obama's speech WAS known before he spoke. What was so objectionable that should have prevented the school district from allowing the spech to be shown without "permission slips" from the parents?

to my 9 and 7 year old there is NO difference between helping the president and helping the country. they are one in the same. the only difference is my 9 and 7 year old would think ANYONE who thinks the president of the united states of america shouldn't be able to speak to the nations schools is a....well i guess another difference is they dont know any derogatory words;)

totellthetruth, please point out what in Obama's speech was "biased propoganda".

SuperDave - if you think race no longer matters do a google search for 'white power' or 'aryan.' Look at the sites that come up, and see how they write about President Obama. Race remains an issue.

Yes Bill in 1991 the congress was all for investigating the President even for something they believed happened a decade earlier...The (conspiracy) trip he made to Spain to make sure the US hostages were not released until after the election of Reagan.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/lib...

It's been said that parents have no right to approve public school text books and therefore, by implication, curriculum. What nonsense. Parents have an absolute right to control what their children are exposed to with the ultimate choice of finding another alternative to public schools (a wise choice for any who make it, by the way). That said, a school district such as Janesville's also has a right to control what they expose their students to as well. It is perfectly appropriate for the school system to decline participation in this address from the President unpreviewed. And now that the contents of the President's speech are known, parents and the school system can decide whether it is appropriate for the students to be exposed to it as is their duty to their students.

In 1991 (or thereabouts), President Bush (the elder) gave just such an address to school children. The democrats who controlled congress at that time demanded investigations and held hearings while condemning President Bush (the first) for his speech even though its content was quite similar to that of President Obama's student address. Democrats currently control Congress again. Will there be demands for hearings and investigations from that august body's controlling partisan leadership? No, I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen. Yes, partisanship is alive and well in this country today in spite of all that change and hope we were promised before the last election.

you're right zoom, you don't. You let others think for you.

"And the content of the speech changed after all the uproar over it began."

Absolutely false. The only thing changed was one sentance of the suggested lesson plan from the Department of Education. The rest stayed the same, and was/is available on the web. As you said, "I don't think...".

Thanks for the reporting Frank Schultz and Gazette. I had thought that the objections to the Presidents speech were somewhat small and isolated to the south, and being overblown by the media. I guess not.

I am so sick of the left and their double speak and whining. When they do it, it is fine, when we do it they whine like little school children.

well said super dave. And the content of the speech changed after all the uproar over it began. I don't think it was always going to be just about staying in school, doing well, and washing your hands. They had planned a work sheet that the children were gonna have to complete, and answer questions such as "what can you do to Help out your president", not help out your country, but the president himself. all that was removed. I seem to remember back when Bush was running against Kerry, a teacher getting removed from the classroom because she put a picture of Pres. Bush (a sitting pres. mind you) on the wall with all the other presidents pictures after Bush won, when a parent complained, she was ordered to also put up a picture of John Kerry and she refused because he was not a president. No one on the left was outraged when that hit the news wire!

Student safety - luckily the dangerous ideas did not hurt our students, we must protect and control their minds.

A tip of my hat to the comments from in_my_opinion. Well said.

Glock - I think the point is that all Presidents are supposed to reach out to our children and have done so on many ways - until Tuesday. Bush used moments like this to sell his No Child Left Behind Act. Many were in disagreement and still are but they didn't threaten the school. You can't yell "Liar" without hearing the message. Ask Representative Wilson.

"Gee, the Democrats screamed just like this when republican presidents tried to do the same thing..."

Guess what, it was wrong then also. Now that that's out of the way, what serious objection do you have?

imagine: "racist reasons"?!? Please. The race card doesn't work anymore, at least not with me. It's 2009, the country has a black president. Get over it. No one I know really could give a care one way or the other as to the race of the man. You're way off-base.

Hey Spunkmeyer, did RAF say that stuff about "...disagree with dignity..." before or after he called NVgrf a "dolt".

Pete, your post at 1:32am made even less sense than your normal posts. I bet you stayed up past your bedtime, didn't you?

You raise a valid point glock. An individual should be able to disagree with someones philosophy without being called a racist. Unfortunately racism does still exist in this country to the extent that its difficult sometimes to determine the basis for much of the criticism especially when it concerns our President. Its also unfortunate that racists will take advantage of the opportunity to spew their trash under the guise of philosophical differences.

All the consternation about a 15 minute speech by the President of the United States is absolutely crazy. This is a traditional "stay in school, study hard" speech given by every President. The text was even available a few days before hand. When has that ever happened?

Epic fail on the part of Karen Schulte. I have respected her leadership up to this point, but her decision was a mistake. Permission slips to listen to the President?

What's ironic is that many conservatives complain about the lack of personal responsibility from our youth, and yet some tried to keep that message from being communicated in schools, to the students that would be most infulenced by the positive words of our first African American President. Absolutely shameful.

oh, that's right! Bush was responsible for 9/11!! I forgot about that! give me a break.

yes he was in one classroom, reading a children's book, not being beamed into every classroom in the country trying to brainwash a whole generation. I believe if the parents want the kids to see the broadcast they should record it and watch it with them.

Are the schools broadcasting or even teaching about what happened 8 years ago today?? I remember being taught about Dec.7 when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, at that time it was the worst attack on American soil, it was eclipsed by 9/11 and I bet they are not showing the children what happened on that day, we need to see those images and have our kids know what happened to us on 9/11 as well, if we ignore it, we are doomed to repeat it.

totellthetruth: i can understand the logic behind not wanting the prez to influence kids who can vote for or against him in the future election. the prez has his next and final election in 2012. what about the kids who wont be eligible to vote in that election?? or the kids who wont be able to vote even in the 2016 elections?? shouldnt they all have a right/obligation to listen to the president of the united states??

So wasn't it on September 11th, George Bush was in a classroom with the media when the twin towers were attacked?

totellthetruth: Yes, I have children in school. I also know that children respect the Presidential postion more than most adults do. I know that children will listen to a "stay in school and work hard" message from a public figure better than they will from a teacher or family member. I know that whether I voted for President Obama or not, I would rather have my children hear the message come from him than most of the "professional sports players" out there who attempt to deliver the same message. What is wrong with a President presenting a message about helping Him to make our country a better place to live? Have you heard of the phrase "What you think about you bring about?" I would much rather think about a future of young people doing whatever they can to better our communities and country and think positively about the future. The alternative is to choose to do nothing but complain about what is wrong like many of the readers here. Negative only brings on more negative and I choose to go with "rainbows and unicorns".

Well said MUSH.Thanks.

And I am tired of being called a racist just because I disagree with the president's policies and views. If Billary would have gotten into office I guess I would be a sexist!

Gee, the Democrats screamed just like this when republican presidents tried to do the same thing, quit crying now and screaming racist propaganda now that we are doing the same to you.

frank schultz isnt calling the parents right wing pundits.

'prospect of the president speaking directly to children enflamed right-wing pundits and others, who said it was political and urged parents nationwide to keep their children at home'

hes referring to the right wing pundits as right wing pundits who are encouraging parents to keep their kids home rather than encouraging them to make that informed decision on whether they want their kids to watch it or not.

good point sannio

totellthetruth: I don't know why you would "promise" to keep you child home on census day. District funding for the next year is calculated on that number. The fewer children in school on that day, the fewer dollars that are received. That very well could result in local taxes increasing even more. Geeessshh!!

I don't know why so many people here appear so suprised at the parental reaction. I think that many people would be shocked if they knew what teachers and administrators dealt with on a daily basis for "parental demands". Remember the days when your parents got a call from the school? You got in trouble from your parents BEFORE they even knew what you did. Nowadays it is "Oh no, not my child. They would NEVER do that." OR "How dare you discipline MY child." Teachers do not have time to make up stories about child behavior issues and often feel as their hands are tied due to unsupportive and sometimes threatening parents. How sad that our public education system has been reduced to this.

The reaction of some parents does not surprise, but again only disappoints, this reader.

Worth repeating! Thank you "mush"

"Objecting to the president's address is just another vile attempt to trash a Democrat. The Republican party, once a decent and honorable organization, has been taken over by hateful and vile zealots who are so pathetically self righteous that they feel justified in doing and saying anything to cast a Democrat in a bad light. Truth is insignificant to them. They are control freaks who can't tolerate not being in control. Decent citizens need to take the Republican party back so that we can have a more respectable political scene."

“People react to fear, not love; they don't teach that in Sunday School, but it's true.” Richard Nixon

Irony is a beautiful thing....somethimes.

TUESDAY our kids were kept from an historic moment (let me count the ways some other time) because some think the president might tell kids lies and influence them to think about things their parents don't want them to think, so the schools are threatened.

WEDNESDAY South Carolina Rep, Joe Wilson has such distain for President Obama that he can't help to yell "liar" in front of the entire world. It didn't matter that what the president was saying wasn't a lie. What mattered was Obama represents something he and the callers just can't live with. Maybe, God made Wilson blurt out the word, so that we could all get a good look to where the "Liar Express" is taking us.

Well, at least Wilson apologized....

Maybe we can't get that from the callers, but maybe leaders within the school system can now see how they too marginalized the President, and kept us moving right along on the "Liar Express."

“How far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without?” Dwight D. Eisenhower

That was a close one, luckily our children survived with their parents views intact. Who knows what kind of ideas the President could have put into their head.

In response to in_my_opinion, thank you so very much for a beautifully written, well reasoned comment. It's good to know there are Republicans out there that maintain the dignity and the values that the old GOP had in the days when my grandparents were party supporters. I'm a Democrat, but I so very much appreciate your honesty, clear thinking, and reasoned approach to this. Much appreciated.

Permission slips to watch the President speak on a public channel in a public address in a public school? Parents "threatening" to withdraw their kids from school for purely political reasons? Get real. Obama's speech was just good old "work hard, stay in school" advice. I pay taxes that educate Janesville kids and like other taxpayers I'm appalled that the superintendent caved to this blatantly political manipulation. This has set an abysmal example for the students in her charge. It shows those kids all you have to do is be nasty enough, scream loud enough, cloak bigotry and intolerance in "the better good" and you can get away with all manner of despicable behavior. Shame on the superintendent but more accurately, shame on the parents who used intimidation tactics to shut down the free exchange of information in a public school.

Whether we like it or not Obama IS THE president. I watched his speech - he said nothing other than what every kid should hear - Education is important to every child...you only get out of it what you want and you have to work hard to be the best you can be. Get over it people. That's what makes our country great, right - freedom of speech (by the way that includes the president.)

Obama "trying to divide the country" ??????

I've come to the conclusion that you are indeed the wittiest satirist on the site.

I rememeber back when I was in 4th or 5th grade and Reagan was shot..........school class rooms hurried up and flipped on the tv..........we didnt need permission slips from our parents inorder for us to watch that in the middle of the day during class time.........Schulte acknowledged teachers had little time to arrange for permission slips. Schulte said she also didn't want to issue a directive that would disrupt lessons teachers had planned for Tuesday, which has been a complaint of teachers over the years. WHAT A BUNCH OF "BS"!!!!! Ya knew about it before the school year started...it's called implementing your lessons, prioritizing and reprioritizing your day. The school district of Janesville really dissappoints me on many levels.....I am sorry to have to have my child in this district.

Way to kowtow the pressure... that's why you're paid the BIG BUCK$$$$, right Karen?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kowtow

Is the Janesville School District going to bus their students to hear ex-President Bush speak like they are doing in Texas? Partianship still rules !!!! What a disgrace !!!!!!

It seems to be accepted by some that people had the right to threaten our schools, our kids, our teachers... and that there is a choice to not show the President's speech. Folks he earned the right to speak to our kids without permission slips being sent home. He is the commander and chief. The school system broke a long standing precedent. Other presidents have done so.... I remember being inspired, angry and having great family discussions about issues because the president spoke. Our president is being marginalized. Why?

Education not Politics and that's the way it should stay, no different then religion. If you can't speak of a god, why should the president get his 2 cents. Maybe we could show videos to our children on how to properly vote...or show them that there are many candidates and other parties...not just democrats and republicans. Oh wait American adults can't even figure that out. Good Day...

Just for the record:
TheAnswerIs42 I never used the phrase, disrespectful. You did.

SarahB1: I did not say the public gets to review texts, I said the teacher. And then these items are usually approved by administrators and/or a board.

I agree that threats are shameful. However, automatically disregarding someones position because you disagree with it, is also shameful. Not all of us who wanted more information regarding the Presidents "lesson" are "Right Wing Pundits" Some of us are actually very moderate who are concerned about the influences on our children.

Objecting to the president's address is just another vile attempt to trash a Democrat. The Republican party, once a decent and honorable organization, has been taken over by hateful and vile zealots who are so pathetically self righteous that they feel justified in doing and saying anything to cast a Democrat in a bad light. Truth is insignificant to them. They are control freaks who can't tolerate not being in control. Decent citizens need to take the Republican party back so that we can have a more respectable political scene.

I wonder how many of the parents that opted their children out of President Obama's speech did so for racist reasons? Certainly, some. The SDJ just catered to their racist ways. Sad.

It is a good thing that the school leaders of today were not around during the desegregation era. We’d still be desegregating. Sometimes you just have to do what is right regardless of the threat of protest. In the 50’s & 60’s, schools leaders confronted often intense protest (often from parents) as they integrate schools. The hard thing is sometimes the right thing.

I think RetiredAirForce said it best when he said: "Instead of disagreeing with dignity you disparage with ridicule." Well said, sir, well said. We should all strive to disagree with dignity. Indeed. :)

This is REALLY a shame on you Ms Schulte!!! During the elections we see our kids bringing home info on the candidates, voting material......they even got to watch the election last year as well as voted and the media put that all over the papers!! WHY ON EARTH would we NOT want our children, especially this day and age, to watch the President, of all people, encourage them to stay in school, hold them accountable for their education and be the best they can be, be productive members of society!?!?!?!? I was dissappointed that my childs school did not watch it. I hoped that they would have. You parents out there that made idol threats to keep your child from school or whatever else you used to threaten and Ms. "S".....all ought to be shamed. You might just as well tell your child(ren) that it's ok to just not go to school because you dont want to encourage them to do better. Look at the shape this world is in....Janesville as well and all the businesses, etc that are closing all of who are laid off indefinetly, people cant find jobs...........what the heck do you think is going to be here for our children when you chose not to have the encouragement given to our kids to make this world a better place....and how is it going to start.....with education you idiots!!!!

As a republican, I found nothing wrong with the President of the United States wanting to address the kids of this nation. Especially when that address was the importance of education.
Mr. Obama meant no harm by asking the question "How can you help me?" That was nothing more than a way to get the kids thinking and getting them to get involved in what could and should have been a healthy discussion.
The people's reaction (yes, many repubs and some dems) to this was shameful. It is the reason that absolutely nothing is getting done in this country. Many politicians (both parties) are in office for no other reason than to better their own careers. They have forgotten that their opinion doesn't mean squat and that they are nothing more than messengers of the majority opinions in their districts. At the same time, people are so wrapped up in their democrat/republican titles to even listen to what someone else has to say.
Although I do not agree with most of what Mr. Obama has to say or the way he is directing this country at the moment, I would not begrudge the office of the president. I am open to hearing what he has to say. I am not so ignorant as to think that my way is the ONLY way or that an opinion other than mine is wrong.
I am sorry for all the parents out there who missed out on great discussions with their kids. The opportunity to see things from a perspective that has not been tainted by the prejudices and practices of the political system were lost to many.
Although neither of my son's schools offered the program to be watched at school, they did get the opportunity to watch it with me at home. I have to admit that if more people thought like 7 or 14 year olds, we would probably get a lot more accomplished.

Nice try, he was not denied the right to speak you dolt. He is granted the same right as every other American, freedom of speech, nothing says anyone has to listen. Was this all carried to far (mess over his speech), yes.

Sad state of affairs when the President of the United States is denied the right to speak to the American people. The far right nutjobs even have sane folks running scared.

I would suggest that everyone read this fabulous commentary from CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/09/08/r......

I'm really saddened (but not surprised) that Janesville chose to not show President Obama's speech. So what if someone pickets the school? This is our President, giving a nonpartisan speech to the nation's children. Parents could opt their child out, or hold them home from the day.

Why do we let fear run our lives, and dictate our administrative and instructional choices? Isn't part of civic engagement learning how to listen to others and how to engage in critical dialogue?

Angry mob wins by a landslide.
I guess watching the president is worse than lock downs for drug searches with dogs. That's not disruptive at all. Gives all the students a nice warm fuzzy, too.

Students don't need permission slips to listen to a the President speak.

Parents who called with veiled threats should be ashamed of themselves.

abc states: "The President can't expect to be able to automatically monopolize the time of teachers and the attention of students" ? How the heck was his speech disrespectful to teachers or students?

The article states "Right Wing Pundits" because that is exactly who were spreading these false rumors about the nature of the speech. And again- that is shameful.

is it legal to verbally threaten someone??

Now we are allowing threats from parents rule are schools. Come on thats it. Grow up people. If I don't like something all I have to do is call and threaten to pull my kid out and you'll bow down. Good to know. If Bush was speaking would we have backed down? I don't think so. Boy that speech was bad for our kids to hear. We don't want them to hear about staying in school and study to hard!

What is missed by those that think the speech should have been shown, is that there was little warning given and even less information as to the content of the speech. Think of it this way, would you want a teacher to use a text book in the classroom without having had the opportunity to review it for appropiateness and content. Also remember that in addition to the speech, there was to be a "lesson" on how to help the president. If President Obama had allowed more time and given additional information for review, there might have been a wider acceptance of his speech. This speech was not a nationally televised speech where individual families could make their own choice whether to watch. Yes, we should respect the Office of the President, but that respect has to be mutual. The President can't expect to be able to automatically monopolize the time of teachers and the attention of students.

In regards to the article: Using phrases, such as "Right Wing Pundits" gives the impression of a bias by the author to those that had difficulties with this event.