What message is not tailered in the first place. I don't know of a single instance where someone goes into a school, either in person or via video and speaks off the cuff; of course it is pre-planned, that's how you educate people. And when firefighters and policemen come in, it usually isn't on career day, it is a special event TAILERED to instruct the children on specific safety issues and how to act/re-act in an emergency, and it is PART OF A NORMAL SCHOOL DAY. This happens every year at least once per year.

As far as the claim that President Obama asked the kids to write a paper describing how they can help President Obama? I am sorry but without VALID proof (and nothing off of u-tube or myspace or any of those other common sites is valid).

I think your biggest issue, and this is just my opinion, is that you do not like the idea of President Obama being in office, for whatever reason; wether it's cause of his party affiliation, because he thinks health-car reform is something you don't agree with or whatever.

As far as other concerns you have brought up, like not teaching kids politics in school, where are they gonna learn it? In their own homes, where their parents teach them it is ok to decide something based on personal feelings or wishes, instead of facts and diplomacy? I am sorry, but in most cases a child is far better off learning about politics in school, from a neutral source. At home is where they need to learn their family's opinions and beliefs, which is not politics.


Disclaimer: I am not suggesting all parents would teach their kids to act based off of emotion and personal wishes, lol just that it would definitely happen. Hell it already DOES happen.

You aer correct in the fact that it is our responsibility to supervise the government; that is why we have the power of voting.
However, it IS your CIVIC duty and responsibility to support the government, which includes the President, even if you do not agree with a particular president or their policies; it is part of being an American. This does not mean you have to vote for his policies if you don't agree with them. And if you do not like how he handles his administration then get out and vote for someone else next election. And it is nothing but pure poppycock to say that we should not trust the government. We voted them into office, we should trust them. If they do something to show untrustworthiness, vote them out. Do not stand on the corner (figurative example) spouting off to impeach the President like so many people did with President Bush. Do not sit in chatroom forums, trying to persuade people to not trust their government, or to act against their government, as not only is acting against your government illegal and severely punishable, it does nothing but to serve dissention instead of bringing people together in a peaceful manner to resolve issues when needed.

Now, I a not saying you are wrong in not liking our current President, or Government; that is your right. But please, do not state that it is not a persons duty to support that government, or that they need to be afraid of government in general because it is the government. Go out and vote during elections. Work your local campaign offices for who you believe in, run for office yourself (if elected I promise you you would have my full support, even if I don't agree with you).

I agree that freedom entails being able to exact change by voting; it's the only way. As far as every administration seeking to do things their way, of course they are, that is why they were put in office. The question that needs to be asked is, when we elect this administration into office, who's wants, needs, concerns are going to be addressed? Some political party's needs? Or mine?
This is why I don't agree with political party's as they generalize everything too much, no matter what group they are. If it doesn't fit in with their generalization they refuse to consider it as a viable option.

It is not a person's duty to serve his government (even Thomas Jefferson would agree here), ESPECIALLY if the government does things that are immoral (taxation, welfarism, warfarism, etc) I would argue that the reason they still allow us to vote is to provide the illusion that a) our opinions still matter and b) the State is legitimate.

Why would a person with a sense of morality NOT act civilly to persuade people to distrust the government (especially when it acts immorally/unconstitutionally, as it usually does)? (see the first amendment of the Constitution-it specifically protects this kind of speech)

Ya'll are still carryin on 'bout this????

I'm mighty principled, and can carry on a good argument for a damn long time!

That's not good fer ur blood pressure ya know

Yeah, I know. I try to take regular breaks and keep a sense of humor about it all. (besides, my doc tells me my blood pressure is extremely healthy :))

many Presidents have given speeches to the schoold kids

this is all just a bunch more of the same old right wing lunacy demonizing Obama and manipulating events in the news in an effort to influence our gullible and a slightly slower brothers and sisters in the public (bless their hearts)

it's the almost the same as the left wing lunacy during the Bush years except for being ham handed and not quite as intelligent as theirs was

I would say "slick" or "polished" rather than "intelligent" to describe the left wing lunacy you mentioned. (JMHO, from experience)

Quietman, you took the words right out of my mouth!

that's one thing I like about you too, is that you DO carry on with your beliefs, but I have yet to see you outright bash someone for theirs, or do anything except offer reasoning for yours (I won't say valid or invalid as that is a matter of opinion to each person ).

Even though I obviously do not agree with a lot of what you believe, I have a lot of respect and admiration for someone who can take a stance and debate it peacefully. :cheers:









By the way, I am still looking up info on Jefferson to contradict you with , as I do NOT believe he would agree with your statement about the public not serving government.