I've been somewhat amused by the strong feelings on both sides of this issue of Obama's planned broadcast to America's children next week. In case you haven't heard, Obama wants to speak to the kids of the country and has asked schools to broadcast the message during the school day. The White House has even provided some lessons and activities to go along with the speech.
Fears from the Right are that he will slip in subtle or not so subtle policy or political messages into the speech ("tell Mommy and Daddy to support universal health care!") The White House assures us that the contents of the speech are all about staying in school, working hard, etc. We won't really know until we hear it.
In the school district where I teach, we were told earlier this week that we needed to broadcast the speech to our students. I didn't like that. I'm not sure what it would accomplish to have all of the kids in the district stop what they were doing for a broadcast from The Leader. Seemed a little, I don't know, kinda Stalinish. But, for protection and as a counter measure, I do have a Ronald Reagan poster up in the back of my classroom.
Then today we get a flurry of e-mails instructing us that we are NOT to broadcast the The Leader's Address to the students after all. Apparently enough parents complained to cause the district to change its mind. As a listener of talk radio to and from work, I know where the impetus came from. Talk show hosts from Rush Limbaugh to Mike Gallagher have all been encouraging their listeners to complain to the schools and even keep their children home on that day if necessary. So we have another Right Wing talk radio-inspired uprising where the drones do Rush's bidding. This also bothered me. Yesterday I was bothered that I was being forced to broadcast The Leader's Address, and today I am bothered by the fact that the district caved within a day and now will not allow us to broadcast it. Again, it really depends on the contents of the speech. If he slips in something to the effect of "tell Mommy and Daddy that they need to behave at town hall meetings..." then it is objectionable. But if it really is a "stay in school" deal, then it can't hurt and the protest is just more knee jerk reaction in a polarized body politic.
I doubt it would inspire any potential drop-outs to change their mind, though. So either way the speech is a waste of time. But I get uncomfortable being told that I have to broadcast His speech. I am equally uncomfortable being told that I am not allowed to.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Nice touch with Ronny's poster. So glad the school changed the memo so the kids don't have to listen or see The Leader once again. Enough already, he's over-exposed himself and it ain't pretty.
Welcome to the U.S. of A., Dez, where neither side is very comfortable with you doing what you want. In any case, I'm sure your kids see the Ronnie poster as an anachronistic touch from their old-fogey teacher... which is what it is, right?
Nice post, Dez.
And I'm glad to hear about the Ronnie poster. Nice touch.
Say, do any of your teachers have posters of Jimmy Carter? If so, you might want to avoid them.
You are such a racist, Dez
I don't know if you came up with "The Leader" idea, but I like it.
Whatever you think of the politics, and whether they were right or wrong. . . . um, Reagan addressed school kids in a speech that was shown on three different days. And in which he discussed his tax policy:
http://mediamatters.org/blog/200909030020
The Leader, indeed.
But JMW, Reagan was right.
The Leader was mine. It seems to fit.
The Reagan poster is a funny thing. It is actually a vintage satire poster that I had on my bedroom walls in the 1980's. It says "Ronbo" and is Sylvester Stallone's body from a Rambo movie shooting some big ass machine gun with Reagan's smiling face on the head. The kids seem to dig it.
I am amazed at all the fuss. Was there so much uproar when Reagan did it? I've seen people get especially offended by the assignment of asking the kids to write a letter on how they can help the President. I seem to remember when the phrase "helping the President" was more or less synonymous with helping your country. Everything is so partisan these days that every word gets twisted around so it can be used to support your side or attack the other side. "United" States, my ass.
This is nothing new. If you think things are partisan now, look back at Thomas Jefferson vs. John Adams. Hell, Alexander Hamilton was killed in a duel by political rival Aaron Burr. Now that is cutthroat politics. Things are pretty tame these days in comparison.
Dre and Dez, you're both right. Of course it's tamer than duels. But no, there wasn't a huge uproar when Reagan did it, because the party out of power at the time hadn't lost its ever-loving mind. Whereas the Republicans these days...
I'm sure there are many R's who don't mind if Obama addresses school children about staying in school. But those aren't the R's with the microphones, or the R's that are in lock-step with the ones at the mic.
Post a Comment