Oh. My. God. President speaks to children. At a school. It's never, ever happened before.http://mediamatters.org/blog/200909030020
It's really sad that there is no debate in this country, just I don't accept your viewpoint, so I'm going to listen to other people who share the same views (even though they probably don't share all the same views). If my daughter could participate I would encourage her to be involved no matter who is president, even if I disagreed with all of his policies. Sheesh, are you afraid your kids will be brainwashed in one friggin speech? On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 6:36 PM, Gene Giannamore < [email protected]> wrote: > WOT = way off topic or wide open throttle? > > > > Anyway my bro-in-law wrote this J > > > > > > > > Dear Livermore school officials, > > > > Here are two Internet links: > > http://www.ed.gov/index.jhtml > > & > > > http://www.docstoc.com/docs/10582301/President-Obamaÿÿ™s-Address-to-Students-Across-America-September-8-2009<http://www.docstoc.com/docs/10582301/President-Obama's-Address-to-Students-Across-America-September-8-2009> > > > > These links describe the President of the United States ÿÿ™ intent to > address pre-K to sixth graders live via the Internet. > > > > I am writing to ask for Livermore schools not to accept this broadcast live > and/or have an opt-in form sent to parents (so that parents would have to > agree to let their children view the speech). > > > > I ask this for the reasons below: > > > > 1. No Constitutional Authority. The Federal government has no > authority to send curriculum to state schools and no authority to address > minors without parental permission. > 2. No politics in school. There has been no national tragedy that the > president is reacting to. The President is trying to set a precedent > whereby he may address our youth directly asserting his influence on > educational policy. This is political in nature and subject to differences > of opinion to-which adults may debate but should be transparent to our > youth > (especially 4-12 years old). A live broadcast does not allow parents > sufficient time to counter the influence of the leader of the free > worldÿÿ™s > perspective on education. > 3. No usurpation of parental rights. Parents have the unequivocal > right to guide their children in matters of politics, religion, morality, > and etc. The president may have rights and responsibilities to speak to > the > public, but will violate parental rights by speaking to minors directly > without supplying a written transcript or preview of the broadcast. > 4. No captive audience. Without and Opt-in policy by the Livermore > Valley Joint Unified School District , our children will be a > *captive*audience to the influence of a politician. I believe need not make > mention > of historical abuses of this power by other nations. > > > > No matter how benign the Presidential address may seem, it reduces our > liberty and our authority over our own children. So if you do not force our > students to watch either by not broadcasting or having parents Opt-in, then > you show your dedication to parental rights and authority. > > > > Thank you, > > Livermore parents > > > > > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
