Youth pro-life groups ask teens to protest Obama on abortion in health care Tuesday

UPDATE, 10:40a: Along the lines of our topic, reader Susie A. just sent this neat photo, from a TN town hall meeting...

abortion is not healthcare 2.jpg

Much has been on the news about Barack Obama's plan to address America's public school students, K-12, next Tuesday, September 8....

CBS News reported yesterday conservatives are "revolt[ing]" at what they saw clearly as an indoctrination attempt, reflected by such writing projects recommended following Obama's speech as, "Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president," which following the uproar has been changed to "Write letters to themselves about how they can achieve their short-term and long-term education goals."

Clearly the White House's Department of Education surrogate planned a not so subtle indoctrination campaign, which they've now had to subliminalize.

Now 3 youth pro-life organizations are planning an indoctrination push-back.

abortion is not healthcare logo.jpgStudents for Life of America, Stand True Ministries, and Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust have joined forces and are encouraging high school students "to make their voices heard and take action," according to a press release.

The groups are asking pro-life students to on Tuesday wear plain, white t-shirts with "Abortion Is Not Health Care" written in large letters across the front, "to protest the President's current support for nationalized health care that will include government funded abortions," states the press release.

Some great statements by organization leaders:

Kristan Hawkins, Executive Director of SFL, remarked, "Students for Life acknowledges the very real danger in passing a nationalized health care plan, and we are doing everything we can to raise awareness about the dangers in this bill. On Tuesday, high school students will show that they do not support any health care legislation which proposes government funded abortions."

Bryan Kemper, President of ST, has similar sentiments: "By very virtue of Obama addressing our students in the classroom at such a critical time when he is dropping in the polls for his radical healthcare reform policies, it is important that students understand that this will be the largest expansion of abortion since Roe v. Wade. Students need to wear their homemade shirts and show school administration, staff, and faculty that indoctrination stops with them."

Jeff White
, Co-Founder of Survivors, remarked, "I saw recently President Obama in a 2nd grade class on a little chair talking with the students. I wonder if he told them that just 8 years ago he advocated the right to kill them."

Go, pro-life students!


A few questions I would want to ask my public school principal well before the day of the address:

Will a transcript of the President's talk be available in advance so parents can decide if they want their children to view the live address? Can parents accompany their children to school on that day?

Personally, I think this type of address should be presented in the evening so parents can sit with their children and discuss it afterwords.

The President needs to be reminded that parents are the primary educators of their children.

Posted by: Janet at September 4, 2009 10:32 AM

My kids school just sent a recorded call to all the parents saying we could opt out if we wanted, we just had to email them by Monday evening. Since I do not know the full content of the speech, and I will not be with them, I am opting out.

Posted by: Kristen at September 4, 2009 10:48 AM

That's good that you have a chance to opt out. Will your children have to take the day off from school or are other arrangements being made by the school so the children can stay?

Posted by: Janet at September 4, 2009 11:16 AM

Just got off the phone with my son's middle school assistant principal. He told me there was an opt out. The teachers will not be using the lesson plans from the internet! I am unsure about opting him out, I was really concerned about the letter writing to Obama and how my son could "help" the president.

Wonder what would have happened if George Bush had decided to do this? Hmmmmm.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at September 4, 2009 11:40 AM

Posted by: Janet at September 4, 2009 11:16 AM

They wont have to take the day off of school. At this point I am not sure about the Jr. High. I think they are going to take the kids who will watch into the gym and have them listen there and the kids who opt out will stay in their classroom.

The elementary schools are leaving it to the teachers. If the teacher wants the kids to watch my kids will go to the library. If the teacher doesn't want to watch then they just carry on as usual.

Carla -

Bush did address students and the dems were all over him BUT since he wasn't the god that the MSM makes Obama out to be it wasn't given the hype this address has been given. Bush gave it from the Oval office (if I remember correctly) and not from a high school needing more tax dollars for security, etc. AND they did not give lessons plans to the school districts.

Posted by: Kristen at September 4, 2009 11:49 AM

Apparently, my home county is opting out of Dear Leader's speech:

And so is neighboring Clarke County. How appropriate that Obama would choose to speak in an Arlington County public high school. I grew up in Arlington County. It's like a little slice of Berkeley on the East Coast. Arlington County voted for Mondale in '84 and Dukakis in '88. If anywhere in this country is Obama Country, Arlington County is it.

Preaching to the choir is what The One does best....

Posted by: Naaman at September 4, 2009 12:06 PM

My younger kids attend a virtual charter school, so this will not be an issue for us. Alison asked if her high school would be airing it and was told no, they had no intention of airing it. She attends a pre-veterinary and agricultural studies charter school that has extremely conservative families enrolled (FFA tends to lean that way!) as evidenced by the fact that during their mock elections last year McCain won by about an 85% majority.

Posted by: Elisabeth at September 4, 2009 1:47 PM

Reagan did the same. On November 14, 1988 as a matter of fact, in a speech that was broadcast live via C-Span to classrooms all over the country:

In the early afternoon hours of November 14, 1988, President Reagan, seated in the White House State Dining Room, proclaimed that he was “particularly pleased to be talking to American students” and then added ”a special hello to those of you who are watching on C-Span.”

Posted by: Hal at September 4, 2009 2:11 PM

And when did the pro-Reagan school curriculum complete with the questions about "How can I help Our Dear President Reagan? What can I do?" get introduced to the kids, Hal?

We're not pissed off that he's addressing students. We're pissed off that liberal teachers are turning this into an indoctrination session, or "teaching moment" as I believe The Big O is fond of calling them.

Posted by: xalisae at September 4, 2009 2:47 PM

but did he ask what the young people could do for HIM? And that address, according to the date, Hal, was done a few months before Reagan left the White House, unless you have the date wrong.

Posted by: LizFromNebraska at September 4, 2009 2:53 PM

Posted by: Hal at September 4, 2009 2:11 PM

Yes, same as Bush. Again, it was nothing like this nonsense that Obama is pulling.

My school district already has curriculum in place. I prefer they stick with it rather than use Obama's "lesson plans."

Posted by: Kristen at September 4, 2009 3:18 PM

The elementary school principal said she has received so many phone calls and emails and is letting parents know that yes the students can opt out but none of the teachers are showing it. :)

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at September 4, 2009 3:53 PM

But Hal...

* Did Reagan have self-avowed communists/truthers/ whitey haters advising him at the time?

*Did Reagan tell his supporters to "get in their faces", "if they push us, then punch back twice as hard?

*Did Reagan remain silent as his supporters engaged in acts of violence against those who oppose his plans?

*Did Reagan have endearing relationships with high educational types that sought to blow up government buildings, stomp on the American flag, and pal around with Venezuelan-communist thugs?

*Were Reagan's economic AND foreign policies crashing down around him as he made that speech?

*Did Reagan announce that those who caused the mess needed to "get out fo the way", and then smile for the camera and say, 'Hi kids!"?

But Hal, but Hal, but Hal.

Posted by: carder at September 4, 2009 4:51 PM

My oldest is being homeschooled, but IF she were in the public school system, I would respectfully request to be in the classroom during the speech, then after school discuss the substance.

And then we'd go to the library and check out an age-appropriate book about the Founding Fathers and the Constitution :0)

Posted by: carder at September 4, 2009 4:54 PM

A little remedial education to B.O. and his gang of 'progressives'.

The 4 golden rules of good management:

1. Never touch a man's/woman's spouse.

2. Never touch a man's/woman's children.

3. Never touch a man's/woman's pocketbook.

4. If you touch a man's/woman's pocketbook you have already touched the other two.

Or as that marine vet so eloquently put it at that town hall meeting in Washington State:

"You stay away from my children!"

Semper Fi bro.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at September 4, 2009 5:21 PM


Are you seriously trying to compare B.O. with Ronald Reagan?

A first term novice who is ashamed of America, who goes all over the world apologizing for America's 'sins' to people, who, though they may hate America, would leap the at opportunity to be an American like a bum on a bologna sandwich.

But B.O. has yet to offer an admission, much less, an apology for his both feet in mouth and head where the sun don't shine collossal jewels of glimmering ignorance and stupidity. There is no telling what he may have said if he did not have a teleprompter to lean on.

I encourage everyone to do a search on youtube for Reagan's address to american students.

Ronald Reagan was an American first and he put America first and his decisions had Americas best interest in mind.

B.O. is no Ronald Reagan.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at September 4, 2009 5:36 PM

I don't understand why people are pulling their kids from school or stopping them from watching this speech. It's going to be about academic achievement, not abortion or any other political issue. Whether you like President Obama or not, he's still the President of the United States. I didn't really like President Bush, but I thought it was great that he was addressing our country's children. So what's the big deal?

Posted by: Haggs at September 4, 2009 5:43 PM

Here is what Ronald Reagan had to say to some middle school students back in 1988, courtesy of Media Matters. The speech was later carried to schools nationwide.


Today, to a degree never before seen in human history, one nation, the United States, has become the model to be followed and imitated by the rest of the world. But America's world leadership goes well beyond the tide toward democracy. We also find that more countries than ever before are following America's revolutionary economic message of free enterprise, low taxes, and open world trade. These days, whenever I see foreign leaders, they tell me about their plans for reducing taxes, and other economic reforms that they are using, copying what we have done here in our country.

I wonder if they realize that this vision of economic freedom, the freedom to work, to create and produce, to own and use property without the interference of the state, was central to the American Revolution, when the American colonists rebelled against a whole web of economic restrictions, taxes and barriers to free trade. The message at the Boston Tea Party -- have you studied yet in history about the Boston Tea Party, where because of a tax they went down and dumped the tea in the Harbor. Well, that was America's original tax revolt, and it was the fruits of our labor -- it belonged to us and not to the state. And that truth is fundamental to both liberty and prosperity.


That kind of rhetoric today will get you put on Janet Napolitano's Homeland Security Terrorist watch list.

Look for Naplolitanoc to make a formal request to have Ronald Reagan's body exhumed and have him indicted and tried for 'counter revolutionary' activities.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at September 4, 2009 5:55 PM

'Progressives' are offended by Reagan's comments.

They were incensed when Reagan identified the then Soviet Union as an 'Evil Empire'.

Liberal leftist humanists became apoplectic when Reagan ordered the bombing of Libya and the invasion of Grenada.

His unabashed support for people struggling to be free from leftist tyrany left liberals howling like banshees.

Today B.O. has surrounded himself with these same 'progressive/liberal/leftist/statist thiefs and liars'.

I say let B.O. address America,s government school students, then play them Reagan's remarks from 1988 and poll them to see who has the better ideas and the better vision for America's future.

When Reagan came into office in 1980 then country was in worse shape than it is now, but it slowly turned around and we have enjoyed the greatest economic boom in history.

But Reagan advocated and did exactly the opposite of what B.O. is advocating and doing.

Communism was in retreat during Reagans two terms in office.

The Soviet Union had been a lethal blow from which it would never recover. Communism could compete with free market economics and liberty.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at September 4, 2009 6:21 PM

The 'teachable moment' will occur after B.O. disimulates.

Responsible parents and students will have some great opportunities to disect B.O.'s offings.

Watch out students. Do not step in the oompah.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at September 4, 2009 6:25 PM

Here is a link to Reagan's speech in it's entirety.


yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at September 4, 2009 6:32 PM

Hey Ken --

Didn't want you to miss this; would you mind elaborating on why you think I should ask Hal about the legal principle of mens rea? I don't see your point.

Posted by: Alexandra at September 4, 2009 6:50 PM

OBama, You are not God, You will never take the place of Jesus Christ you demon posessed Loonitic!

Posted by: RJ Sandefur at September 4, 2009 7:51 PM

This is ridiculous.

How often did we feel anguish when we saw that President Bush could not attend a press conference without someone throwing shoes at him? Or that he couldn't go a day without Democrats hating every ounce of his being? He couldn't make them like him even when he stood up for immigrant's rights. He was blamed for the war, No Child Left Behind- he was probably even blamed for the Holocaust by more than a couple of people. People wrote books slandering his name, they disregarded the fact that he is one of the most beloved people of all time to the Africans because he has done so much to help them. He was called a fascist. He could not make a move because of the pure hatred that spewed from Democrats' mouths- and that was before he even sat down in his chair in the Oval Office.

And now the same thing is happening to President Obama.

We don't have to hate him. He's trying here. He's not motivated by evil, he's not talking about politics, he's doing the best that he can, and we absolutely cannot be teaching children to hate...or to disrespect the president for trying to encourage them to stay in school. He's not hawking health care. He's not. He's trying to get kids to stay in school- just like he probably wants his two young daughters to stay in school.

But this hatred of him is wrong. Hate his politics if you want- I can't stand that he supports abortion- but hating this speech about education is wrong.

We cannot let this turn into another beating like the one that poor Bush took that he didn't deserve.

Posted by: Vannah at September 4, 2009 8:19 PM


How does opting out your child viewing a president's speech equate to hatred or even disrespect? I believe most parents are not so much concerned about the speech itself, which will probably be the typical "stay in school, kids!" motivational speech. What concerns them is, given the heated debate on government's role in the private sector and the national mood in general, many teachers may seize this opportunity to push their political agenda. For the children who are too young to grasp political issues, teachers may (and have in the past) take advantage of the fact that their naive classroom will take their political opinion at face value. For children who do understand the issues, teachers may use their authority to discourage or outright silence dissent. In my public school experience, I received punishment for disagreeing with a teacher's stance during a debate, and saw this happen to others as well. The national mood is very tense and people (some of them teachers) are significantly more politically outspoken than usual. I know I can't speak for everyone, but I believe it's not the prospect of the speech itself, but the timing.

Posted by: Janette at September 4, 2009 8:41 PM

Love ya Vannah.

Pointing out his associations and his ideology is not "hate". No one has read the text of the speech yet, so it remains a wait-and-see.

That being said, it's the whole kit-and-caboodle. The timing. The tactics regarding other matters. The fact that as his numbers rapidly come back to earth, this kind of outreach gives the impression of someone who is desperate of reaching out to someone, anyone.

Janette made a good point: just prior to the election, there was a viral video of a teacher in North Carolina shaming a student because her parents were going to vote for McCain. That teacher stood there, hands on her hips, invoking the Lord's name, and basically degraded that student.

To her credit, she later apologized with tears in her eyes, and the student and her parents forgave her.

So it's not far-fetched to say that type of incident could repeat itself.

I hope for the best in that speech, and most importantly that he sticks with the tele-prompter!

(There. Was that hate?)

Posted by: carder at September 4, 2009 9:17 PM

Let's play "Name That Radical", Vannah.

“I walked out of jail and into my first teaching position—and from that day until this I’ve thought of myself as a teacher, but I’ve also understood teaching as a project intimately connected with social justice. After all, the fundamental message of the teacher is this: you can change your life—whoever you are, wherever you’ve been, whatever you’ve done, another world is possible. As students and teachers begin to see themselves as linked to one another, as tied to history and capable of collective action, the fundamental message of teaching shifts slightly, and becomes broader, more generous: we must change ourselves as we come together to change the world. Teaching invites transformations, it urges revolutions small and large. La educacion es revolucion!”

Hint: He and Obama worked together in Chicago.
Hint: He made this speech in Venezuela only a few years ago and praised, yes, PRAISED Chavez.

No big deal, though.

Posted by: carder at September 4, 2009 9:41 PM

"Today, to a degree never before seen in human history, one nation, the United States, has become the model to be followed and imitated by the rest of the world. But America's world leadership goes well beyond the tide toward democracy. We also find that more countries than ever before are following America's revolutionary economic message of free enterprise, low taxes, and open world trade. These days, whenever I see foreign leaders, they tell me about their plans for reducing taxes, and other economic reforms that they are using, copying what we have done here in our country."

But he didn't tell those children about his responsibility for the support of regimes that murdered thousands of innocent people, not to mention quite a few priests.
Whoever gets slaughtered in the name of propping up "democracy" whether our idea of democracy is in line with the people's idea of "democracy" or not.

Yes, Ronnie is responsible for a whole lotta crap, but at least we said a few kind things when he died.

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 4, 2009 10:10 PM

I also love the hypocrisy of some of you, who cried "Bush Derangement Syndrome" but sound crazier and crazier as the days go by.

If Obama just wants to say some nice things to our kids about staying in school I don't know what the big effing deal is. Instilling good values in children means being able to let them listen to the president but let them make their own decisions about politics. That value was instilled early on in my house. If I asked my mom what she thought, she would say, "what do you think?" She was not afraid to answer questions I had about what the presidents were doing. I grew up around when Bill was "doing his thing" and regardless she let me sit down with her and watch the news if I wanted.

I may be a little rambling right now but seriously. I've never seen this kind of thing happening before. For kids, the president is just this cool guy running the country. At that point, if they are too young or find no interest in politics, it's at least enough to know the head honcho is thinking about you and wants you to succeed. I never had an opinion on presidents and politics until I reached middle school; before then, the presidents were on the backside of my ruler and they gave us these cool pins for when we do well in school. Again, if he's not talking politics, it's good he's trying to talk to kids. To be sooo opposed to that is close to having Obama Derangement Syndrome as it gets.

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 4, 2009 10:23 PM

:) to PrettyinPink.

(well, I don't know anything about Ronald Reagen, so I'm not sure if I agree with you there, but the last post, yeah)

Posted by: Vannah at September 4, 2009 10:48 PM

You nailed it, PIP: "If"

Posted by: carder at September 4, 2009 10:50 PM

"I've never seen this kind of thing happening before."

Where were you the past eight years?

Posted by: carder at September 4, 2009 10:59 PM

"Where were you the past eight years?"

Yeah. I don't remember people en masse yanking their kids out of school the minute the president tell them to "achieve their dreams." Also, I haven't ever witnessed the kind of hypocrisy (i.e. "Obama Derangement Syndrome) in such a real way.

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 5, 2009 3:37 AM

Vannah-do some research into his policies in Central and South America. It's hard to find some credible linkable stuff at this point because I've done a lot of reading about it in books and I don't know what kind of access to documents you have. But most databases if you have access to them through a library or something, will have a whole gambit of papers about the foreign policies of Reagan et al in that area of the world.

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 5, 2009 3:48 AM

I'm not canonizing Reagan, just so we get that straight.

Nor am I "yanking" my kid out of school cuz of his address. If others do, that's their perogative. Just like those who don't see the big deal, they're the parent(s), fine. No sweat off my back.

There's a whole lot of context surrounding this event. Some choose to take that into consideration, others don't.

And if you could provide the complete text of his speech to the kids, then that would possibly settle the matter.

I don't know, PIP. My experience with BDS and PDS makes ODS look like tootsie rolls.

Posted by: carder at September 5, 2009 5:57 AM

It is not so much that Obama is speaking to my children and saying Stay in School, Get an Education. Great.
It was the long list of curriculum lesson plans put out by the government that I wasn't about to let my children work on. Tell Obama how you can help him blah blah blah. He needs my kindygartners help??

One principal said to me, "We write our own lesson plans."

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at September 5, 2009 5:57 AM

I never thought that you would be the zealous sort anyways, Carla. :)

I read your blog. I wasn't sure if you were going to pull your children out of school or not, but if you were I'm pretty sure it would be for different reasons than you just don't like Obama. I wasn't directing that comment at you. :)

Thanks, PrettyinPink. :)

I'll look into it...I can't believe I don't know anything about the history of my own presidents...doh.

But I do know the name of the Icelandic Prime Minister. Yeah, I'm bad. :)

Posted by: Vannah at September 5, 2009 10:17 AM

The Icelandic Prime Minister?

That can be a good thing. Shatter the myth that Americans aren't "cultured".

Posted by: carder at September 5, 2009 10:29 AM

Lest we forget, hypocrisy can go both ways, in real ways, PIP.

Seems like the dems had their concerns, too. From the Washington Post on October 3, 1991:

"House Democrats criticized President Bush yesterday for using Education Department funds to produce and broadcast a speech that he made Tuesday at a Northwest Washington junior high school.

The Democratic critics accused Bush of turning government money for education to his own political use, namely, an ongoing effort to inoculate himself against their charges of inattention to domestic issues. The speech at Alice Deal Junior High School, broadcast live on radio and television, urged students to study hard, avoid drugs and turn in troublemakers.

"The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students," House Majority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) said. "And the president should be doing more about education than saying, 'Lights, camera, action.' "

Two House committees demanded that the department explain the use of its funds for the speech, an explanation that Deputy Secretary David T. Kearns provided late in the day in a letter to Rep. William D. Ford (D-Mich.), chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee. Education Secretary Lamar Alexander was out of town. [...]"

Rep. Patricia Schroeder (D-Colo.), chairwoman of the Select Committee on Children, Youth and Families, said it was outrageous for the White House to "start using precious dollars for campaigns" when "we are struggling for every silly dime we can get" for education programs.

Rep. Martin Frost (D-Tex.) said that if Bush feels obliged to use government funds to hire outside consultants "to make him look good," then he should fire some of the public relations experts on the White House payroll. "Then the president might be more sympathetic to unemployment benefits," Frost said, referring to Bush's threat to veto legislation to extend benefits."

Posted by: carder at September 5, 2009 10:34 AM

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 4, 2009 10:10 PM


You need to go and sit down with your mom again.

I have met and interacted with people who survived the communist experiments in southeast asia, central america and eastern europe and the island nation of Cuba. I have never heard one of those people criticize Ronald Reagan's policies and everyone one of them wanted to be or became an American by choice or desired to experience the freedom of Americans.

War is always hell and lots of innocent people are killed. Innocent people were killed in our war for independence from Britain.

Was the reward to be obtained worth the lives that were lost?

Have innocent Iraqi's died as a result of our invasion and liberation of Iraq and do they continue to die today.


Ask their surviving family if the freedom they now enjoy is and will be worth the loss.

Ask the surviving family members of the soldiers who have lost their lives in the struggle, not only to give Iraqis freedom, but to prevent Jew hating mass murderers and serial killers from killing Americans if it was worth the cost.

Those who believe it was not worth the effort will be in the minority, but they will still be enjoying peace, safety and freedom they probably would not otherwise be experiencing.

Ronald Reagan once said there is guaranteed way to have peace: Surrender to your enemy.

I prefer to fight and gain peace the old fashioned way by defeating my enemy.

If you are one of those who is willing to surrender to those who would use the government to steal my money and use it to indoctrinate my children and incrementally enslave a nation to a tyranical state, then you deserve the bitter fruits of your labor.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at September 5, 2009 10:39 AM

Regarding Carder's post at 10:34-

I know that I can't be the only person who thinks that political parties have to go...


Oh, and yeah, I'm cultured- ja! No, actually, the reason is that I can't even express how much that I wish that I could go to Iceland. :)

Together we can form the Coalition on Naming Leaders of Other Countries. :)

I'll take Scandinavia, peeps.

Posted by: Vannah at September 5, 2009 10:47 AM

Thanks so much carder for your great post at 10:34am talk about Demoncrats being hypocrits. When their rock-star Obama wants to address the school-kid with a "curriculum" provided by his White House buddy from Chicago Arne Duncan asking kids "What can you do for the President?" it is a GREAT idea when Republican George H. W. Bush talked to kids it is "how dare he". What a joke. You could not make up this stuff. Would love to see those quotes on Hannity or O'Reilly.

Posted by: Prolifer L at September 5, 2009 10:59 AM

What is it about Iceland? Didn't they have a run for the banks not too long ago?

Posted by: carder at September 5, 2009 12:36 PM

They're struggling economically, but I've read that things should smooth out soon; I'm no expert; I don't know for sure. I hope so. I just develop random obsessions every now and then. Before Scandinavia, it was Law & Order. It adds such zest to life. :D

So, anyways, back on topic. Uh...

Tee hee!

Posted by: Vannah at September 5, 2009 1:19 PM

Has anyone seen this?

"I am What I Learn"

Video Project: 
• Teachers could encourage students to participate in the U.S. Department of Education’s 
“I Am What I Learn” video contest.  On September 8, the Department of Education will 
invite students age 13 and older to submit a video no longer than two minutes in length, 
explaining why education is important and how education will help them achieve their 
dreams.  Teachers are welcome to incorporate the same or a similar video project into a 
classroom assignment. More details will be released via

Whatever happened to the inherent value and dignity of each human person, regardless of their "learning"?


Posted by: Janet at September 5, 2009 1:44 PM

"Whatever happened to the inherent value and dignity of each human person, regardless of their "learning"? "

That idea was thrown out a LONG time ago, Janet. Very sad.

Posted by: Bobby Bambino Author Profile Page at September 5, 2009 2:09 PM


Right. It's one thing for parents to explain to children that learning is one part of who they are. It's another to have the government telling children what to think about themselves. The government doesn't have the authority to tell our children "who they are". Just watch, next, the gov. will be handing out full college scholarships to the creators of the top 100 videos. Our bankrupt nation is paying for these freebies.

Posted by: Janet at September 5, 2009 2:28 PM

On a happier note, Happy Labor Day weekend to all. Prayers of thanks to those who work so hard to support their families and prayers to those who are looking for work. God bless.

Posted by: Janet at September 5, 2009 2:32 PM

To those assuming it is hypocritical to opt to remove their kids from school during Obama's speech, I would say that entirely depends on this: Would those same people have made accusations of hatred or alarmism to those who would've opted out of a Bush speech during a tense national moment? Again, I can't speak for everyone, but if Bush was planning to give a speech during the time when his popularity was plummeting and he was pushing controversial policies, I would totally understand a concerned parent opting out. And again, not so much because they would have a problem with a generic motivational speech to school kids, but because of the hostile political tone that could easily cause teachers to pull out their soap boxes.

Why do we insist on reducing our opponents to insulting absolutes? "You made a different decision than me, so that means hate the president." "You took your child out of class during Bush's/Obama's speech, so you don't want your child to think for themselves."

Also, it is simply reality that people are going to be more distrustful of a president with whom they already have numerous disagreements. If you approve of most of a president's actions, it's only natural that you're going to take a fairly trusting approach to his plans and be more forgiving of his mistakes. And those that disapprove of most of his actions aren't going to give him the same benefit of the doubt and will be apt to blow the whistle, since they've come to expect to disagree with him. I would hardly call this hypocricy or a derangement syndrome.

Posted by: Janette at September 5, 2009 9:15 PM

To end abortion, we have to end all efforts at procreation. Twenty percent of pregnancies result in miscarriages, known in he medical community as spontaneous ABORTION.

What's more, thirty to fifty percent of conceptions result in blastocysts naturally not being implanted, and passed during menstruation. The women extremely rarely are aware that a pre-born child with a soul was killed off in a perfectly natural process that has been happening as long as humans have been around.

Therefore, the chance that married women trying to conceive, or just having sex without contraception, have had abortions -- most without knowing it.

And it follows that if we're serious about ending abortion -- ALL ABORTION -- everyone has to stop having sex... Unless they're gay or lesbian.

For references, see this essay:

As for Obama's indoctrination attempts: Indeed, how dare the jerk emphasize the importance of education to students! And how dare he seek health care reform that is bound by the law, which ensures THAT NOT A SINGLE PENNY CAN BE SPENT ON ABORTIONS OR EVEN SUGGEST ABORTION AS AN OPTION TO PREGNANT WOMEN!

And how dare he seek medical reform that would ensure the kids he indoctrinates are guaranteed health care -- as well as their parents! The gall of the president, who was born in Baghdad and served in Saddam's elite guard, to try to help a single person!

And congratulations to so many of the commenters, who would benefit the most from health care reform, for having the common sense to oppose it the second a person cries Socialism! Who needs research and the truth -- especially when both are a millisecond-Google-search away!

Kudos all around!

Posted by: Calvin Bandini at September 5, 2009 10:29 PM

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 5, 2009 3:37 AM

Yeah. I don't remember people en masse yanking their kids out of school the minute the president tell them to "achieve their dreams." Also, I haven't ever witnessed the kind of hypocrisy (i.e. "Obama Derangement Syndrome) in such a real way.



You remind of the baseball umpire who was trying to defend his bad calls to the managers of both teams. He said , "I just call em the way I see em.!"

The managers said, "If I was you I would come up with a better argument. That one is not serving you well."

The number of parents who are threatening to opt their kids out of school that day is a minority and the ones who actually do it will be an even smaller number.

I would 'guess' that most of these vocal parents are angry with B.O. because they disagree with his actions and policies and statements over health care and they are angry with congress for the same reason and lo and behold the majority in congress who support the president are all democrats.

Peope are responding and reacting to an abrupt and radical change in our government policies.

About half the people who voted in the last presidential electin did not vote for B.O..

No surprise they would not agree with his policies that are even more radical than his supporters had believed.

You agree with B.O. so you do not 'see' that with which the other half of the country is objecting.

You do not have to agree to see, but you still ought to be able to see if you will take off your rose colored obama designer glasses.

You want to believe this is all just partisan politics and/or racially motivated dislike of B.O.
You want to believe that some conservative version of the liberal billionaire Soros is pumping all kinds of money into an 'astroturf' manufactured protest.

That is the way you 'see' it because that is the way you choose to 'see'.

yor bro ken

ps: what happened to your kinsmen okie from muskogee soooooooooooonerman/woman? Did the game wardens arrest him/her for spotlighting deers or telephoning fish?

Posted by: kbhvac at September 6, 2009 8:36 AM

Down goes Van Jones!
Down goes Van Jones!
Down goes Van Jones!

Although, truth be told, him not getting a paycheck signed by the federal government doesn't mean he still won't have O's ear.

Up next: Mark Lloyd. Or will it be John Holdren? Or Valerie Jarrett? Or Cass Sustein?

Czars are the gifts that keep on giving.

Posted by: carder at September 6, 2009 2:35 PM

PIP, stop by more often. We need your piont of view here.

Posted by: Hal at September 6, 2009 3:47 PM

Obama 'green jobs' adviser quits amid controversy
Sep 6 02:19 AM US/Eastern

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Barack Obama's adviser Van Jones has resigned amid controversy over past inflammatory statements, the White House said early Sunday.


Mr. Van Jones, welcome! Your 'place' will be at the extreme left rear of the Obama campaign bus, between Jeremiah Wright and B.O.'s grandmother Dunham.

No mr. Jones, not inside the bus, under it.

You've come a long ways baby.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at September 6, 2009 4:05 PM

Man, this seems so Orwellian or worse. There is no doubt in my mind that this is a pure attempt at indoctrination.

Posted by: George at September 7, 2009 2:04 PM

Obama neesd a Vetting Czar.

Posted by: carder at September 7, 2009 4:13 PM

And I need a Spelling Czar. Sheesh.

Posted by: carder at September 7, 2009 4:14 PM