I support Pres. Obama and the contents of his speech, but I would prefer that he had not sought to have it broadcast at schools. My reasoning is as follows.
1. He is setting a precedent for other politicos to beam messages at our kids. Senators, governors, sheriffs, and city council members will now think they have the right.
2. This time I agree with the message and showed my kids the speech afterward, but what if it were W drumming up support for his war on terror/drugs/illegal immigrants/freedom of thought or whatever? He was president, too.
3. School is a place to teach kids what they can't get other places. Teach them what they need to be taught and let them go. I reserve the right to educate my children what doesn't need to be taught at school. More time in school doesn't mean better learning. Of OECD nations, American children spend the most number of hours in school, and look at the results.
2 comments:
It can't be considered setting a precedent when Reagan and Bush Sr. did the same thing. It's not that unusual and the precedent was actually set many years ago, so I think your slippery slope argument is misplaced.
The rope is still a rope and it is slippery as ever. The phobomedia has made it an issue this time, and though Reagan or Bush Papa got free access to the schools, it doesn't change my opinion that the president asking for access is a mistake. Even if the idea got floated in meetings, it should never have been pursued. Every elected official, especially governors, can claim that they have the right to school time.
Post a Comment