The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux)

[Betty]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I wouldn't be excited for Reagan to address school children,

Are you sure about that? I mean - he's dead and all. It would be like Zombie Reagan or something and that wouldn't excite you in the least?

[Alex]

Yes, because it is important that both the pro and con side be thoroughly presented on the hotly contested issue of valuing education, taking responsibility for your own education, and contributing to an environment where education is respected.

I think Newt Gingrich pretty much nailed it when he said ""Why is it political for the president of the United States to discuss education?"

Though, of course, that was in 1991 when George Bush was doing the same thing (with almost exactly the same talking points as Obama has announced). I don't know if there was an uproar in 1986 when Reagan did a student Q&A broadcast nationally to schools in which he not only talked about the importance of education but also discussed actual politically controversial issues such as nuclear disarmament and taxation.

But in the stupid kabuki of national politics, when Bush did it in 1991 there were some Democrats who decried it as a political event. In the interest of fairness, let me say now that they too were being douchebags (though the Bush event was in the midst of the just ramping up 1992 presidential campaign, but regardless I think it is good).

And our national political leaders interact without pre-filtering with our students all the freaking time. Both of our senators addressed assemblies while I was in high school (the Flinstones-naming-inspired pair that was Brock Adams and Slade Gorton). Are we all aware that Michelle Obama has regularly been visiting our nation's elementary schools since January, indoctrinating children wherever she goes?

But then I honestly don't get this idea that our elementary schools are supposed to be designed to protect our children from teh complex thoughts of the real world. I am amused, however, that among certain circles our current president is apparently just as reprehensible and damaging to young minds as evolution.

[Betty]

Originally Posted by Mousey Girl

The way the (Bakersfield) local schoo odistricts are phrasing it is that they don't show the students anything that has not been reviewed. This is a standard policy, across the board, no matter who is wanting to address the students.

Now, if Nickolas was in high school, and this was shown in a government class, and was open for discussion I would not have an issue. I do have an issue with him in 7th grade, no real discussion allowed. We discuss politics in my house, we review both sides of an issue. When he makes a black or white statement, we discuss that there are shades of gray that also need to be seen.

My parents are ultra conservative. Bakersfield is mostly conservative. I do my best to show him that is more than one way to look at things. I can't count the times he and I have debated about what he heard over at my parents. For an example, he knows that The Old People oppose gay marrage. He knows that I support gay marrage. We talked about it at great length.

Every one is entitled to their own opinion. I may not agree with that opinion, but it doesn't make it any less valid than mine.

So why not let him watch it and then discuss it with him?

[scaeagles]

I was in HS in 1986, but do not recall seeing the Reagan thing, but it shouldn't have happened, particularly since it included those issues.

But like I stated, it isn't the fact that Obama is addressing the kids that I think is problematic. It's primarily the department of ed suggested discussion points that go along with it.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Mousey Girl

The way the (Bakersfield) local schoo odistricts are phrasing it is that they don't show the students anything that has not been reviewed. This is a standard policy, across the board, no matter who is wanting to address the students.

Except that, as has been mentioned several times already, the material is available for review. They, for their own political reasons, have CHOSEN not to review it apparently.

Every one is entitled to their own opinion. I may not agree with that opinion, but it doesn't make it any less valid than mine.

But you'll shield your child from hearing an elected official speak? On an entirely non-controversial subject matter no less?

Originally Posted by Alex

Yes, because it is important that both the pro and con side be thoroughly presented on the hotly contested issue of valuing education, taking responsibility for your own education, and contributing to an environment where education is respected.

Education is the enemy of the modern conservative movement.

[Alex]

Can you point out in the current version of them (the Department of Education materials) specific quoted language you find problematic? Because I read them and don't see in them what you're saying is there.

Obviously that is because we're viewing the world very differently (I think it is wonderful for kids to be exposed to this stuff; you obviously don't).

So I'd be curious to see a mini-Rosetta stone where you say "this exact language means X."

This is not to say that I am all that impressed by the materials. They're full of the bull**** inanities that I hated about them when I was in school. But I don't find them bothersome beyond that.


As a completely side question. If elementary school minds are not yet ready to be exposed to political debate, how is it that they are capable of handling religious indoctrination. I'm assuming you didn't take the position that the nature of god was too complex for your 8-year-old so you were going to filter out any exposure to religious ideas until she was old enough to be properly skeptical?

[wendybeth]

Suggested discussion points, projects, etc are all geared as an aid to (tired and overworked) teachers, most who welcome guidance in lesson planning for subjects outside their regular curriculum. You should know that pretty much ALL curriculum, public and private, comes with the same type of advice. This is not some new Commy addition to our educational process- like I said before, it's standard. I'll send you a zillion examples from the curriculum sites I use for Tori's school stuff. Ask any teacher- they are not required to follow these suggestions. (Unless specifically directed by the leadership of their school or district, which is rare).

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Alex

As a completely side question. If elementary school minds are not yet ready to be exposed to political debate,...

In elementary school I took part in a program called something like "Kids Vote". It was during the '88 election campaign (4th grade for me). We discussed the process of primaries and elections, we talked about the candidates, we either debated or read debate material on a few issues, and it all culminated with a huge "caucus" at Universal Studios (when they had the An American Tail play area thing) where we heard speeches and voted. It was awesome.

[Mousey Girl]

Originally Posted by Betty

So why not let him watch it and then discuss it with him?

That would be fine, but not in a school setting. If he wants to see it he can watch it here, with me, and together we can talk about it.

[JWBear]

Originally Posted by Motorboat Cruiser

The abortion doctor being shot, the Holocaust Museum shooting - just the tip of the iceberg. Threats against the President of the United States have increased 400% since Obama took office. I'm pretty firmly convinced that the next act of terrorism that this country sees will be domestic and from someone who self-affiliates with the Republican party. I hope I'm wrong.

Carefull MbC… Awhile back, I was eviscerated on this board for suggesting that violent right-wing extremism is on the rise.

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Moonbats taking things into their own hands....like the guy in Colorado who vandalized a democrat party office to try to make it look like Republicans did it? Or the other guy who bit off the pinky of an Obamacare protester? Would you say that the US Army soldier who took a grenade into the barracks a few years ago and blew up a bunch of people was inspired by those on the left protesting the war?

So? Do these things excuse the actions of those on the right? I, and many others, decried these events. When was the last time you spoke out against right-wing domestic terrorism?

Why is "But, you're side did it too!" so commonly a fall-back excuse by the right? I never hear Democrats saying that.

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Perhaps John Kerry who was saying we were terrorizing women and children in the dark of night and killing innocent civilians? Does he get the blame?

Um… because we were?

Originally Posted by BarTopDancer

Of course you weren't. To be aware of that, so you could educate yourself would go against the "Well I just don't trust him and I don't want my kids to see it...because if they do I might have to hold an intelligent discussion with them about why I feel the way I feel and answer questions and.... *gasp* find out they might feel differently then me". And as a toaster-touting paranoid Republican that just can't happen.

Does that about sum it up?

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Education is the enemy of the modern conservative movement.

Too true.