I absolutely refuse to comment on this thread.  (oops!) 

-----Original Message-----
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 9:06 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: [WOT] FW: Presidential Address Sept. 8th

This is WOFT [1], and is SFA [2]. Particularly so after the rash of OT
[3] posts that have recently been hitting this list.  I was really
hoping things were getting back to normal.  Can't these things at
least be saved until Friday?

And OK, my interests are peaked.  Is this FUD [4]?  I ask because the
only sites online I see reference this are nothing I would concider
trustworthy news sources.  The White House blog makes no mention of
such an agenda for the 8th [5].

1.  Way Off F***ing Topic
2.  Super F***ing Annoying
3.  Off Topic
4.  Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt
5.  http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/My-Education-My-Future/

--
ME2



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(tm)s-Address-to-Students-Across-America-September-8-2009
>
>
>
> These links describe the President of the United States ÿÿ(tm) 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:
>
>
>
> No Constitutional Authority.  The Federal government has no authority to
> send curriculum to state schools and no authority to address minors without
> parental permission.
> 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(tm)s
> perspective on education.
> 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.
> 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/>  ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

Reply via email to