Who here will be watching Obama's speech with your homeschooler(s) next week?

[Debbie in OR]

Nope. We don't have TV but even if we did, knowing that he would be ok with his minor daughters having an abortion (with or without parental notificiation) means he has lost all credibility as a role model, in my book.

[Christy B]

Absolutely! he's the President. It's an important topic. Agree or disagree, what does anybody have to gain by tuning out???

 

:iagree:

[Nicoleab2]

No, but we don't have TV. :D If he does address a joint session of Congress on health insurance reform, I will listen if it is carried on the radio.

 

:iagree:

[cathmom]

If it's going to be on, I'll probably plan to watch it unless it conflicts with something. Then maybe I'll record it.

[Christy B]

Nope. We don't have TV but even if we did, knowing that he would be ok with his minor daughters having an abortion (with or without parental notificiation) means he has lost all credibility as a role model, in my book.

 

Hm, this approach confuses me a bit. I understand not wanting to encourage your children to idolize people whose lifestyle and beliefs undermine your own convictions (and in not watching TV on a regular basis, clearly you're being consistent in that goal).

 

However, how will you feel about your children going to college? Having a job? Because at some point, your kids are going to have an authority whose belief systems collide with theirs. I have observed a handful of Christian young adults who can not hold down a job because every time they discover that their boss drinks/smokes/mows the lawn on Sunday -- they quit, saying they can't work for someone so ungodly.

 

At some point, your children may have a boss or a commanding officer or a supervisor who has had an abortion, or who supports the availability of abortion. Are they going to have a problem respecting that person's office and authority? Would you discourage them from listening to anything that anyone has to say, whose belief system does not match your own? I'm just not seeing how that works in the real world, and I'd go so far to say that I'd be a little nervous about what's going to happen when they are no longer under your watchful eye. (Not you/your just directed at you, specifically -- in general, folks who would take the same approach, clearly you are not alone in your point of view.)

 

OF COURSE, it goes without saying that if you don't care to watch a speech, you certainly don't need to, and gracious, you don't need to explain to me why. :) But the reason of "he has lost all credibility as a role model", just sort of jumped out at me, again -- in the *context* of what I'm observing with some young adults IRL. I'm just not seeing the connection between the suitability of a President as a personal role model for my children (which, incidentally, I agree -- I would not choose President Obama to be my children's role model) and whether or not to watch a speech (which I would choose to use as an opportunity for discussion, including those very important points at which I disagree with the President).

 

I'm thinking and wondering aloud, not questioning or challenging your authority as a parent, I hope that comes across.

[lionfamily1999]

Christy B, my dh does not work for dishonest people. He has quit jobs, because his boss, supervisor, or even the owner of the business has proven to be a liar/thief/etc. This has not worked to our disadvantage. He now works for an honest man. While times are hard, there is still the benefit of knowing that you are earning money for someone you respect. I have quit jobs for the same sorts of reasons. At one point, I found out my supervisor (at a job I loved) was a filanderer. I quit. Now, I miss the job itself, but I could not have worked for or with him, knowing the kind of person he is.

 

You can choose with whom you work and who you earn money for. It doesn't prove impossible, and when those things are important to you, then the rewards are beyond any losses.

[swimmermom3]

Hm, this approach confuses me a bit. I understand not wanting to encourage your children to idolize people whose lifestyle and beliefs undermine your own convictions (and in not watching TV on a regular basis, clearly you're being consistent in that goal).

 

However, how will you feel about your children going to college? Having a job? Because at some point, your kids are going to have an authority whose belief systems collide with theirs. I have observed a handful of Christian young adults who can not hold down a job because every time they discover that their boss drinks/smokes/mows the lawn on Sunday -- they quit, saying they can't work for someone so ungodly.

 

At some point, your children may have a boss or a commanding officer or a supervisor who has had an abortion, or who supports the availability of abortion. Are they going to have a problem respecting that person's office and authority? Would you discourage them from listening to anything that anyone has to say, whose belief system does not match your own? I'm just not seeing how that works in the real world, and I'd go so far to say that I'd be a little nervous about what's going to happen when they are no longer under your watchful eye. (Not you/your just directed at you, specifically -- in general, folks who would take the same approach, clearly you are not alone in your point of view.)

 

OF COURSE, it goes without saying that if you don't care to watch a speech, you certainly don't need to, and gracious, you don't need to explain to me why. :) But the reason of "he has lost all credibility as a role model", just sort of jumped out at me, again -- in the *context* of what I'm observing with some young adults IRL. I'm just not seeing the connection between the suitability of a President as a personal role model for my children (which, incidentally, I agree -- I would not choose President Obama to be my children's role model) and whether or not to watch a speech (which I would choose to use as an opportunity for discussion, including those very important points at which I disagree with the President).

 

I'm thinking and wondering aloud, not questioning or challenging your authority as a parent, I hope that comes across.

 

Great post. I have wondered about this too. We watched speeches during the previous administration (which we didn't support) and discussed their positive and negative aspects as well. We aim for a respectful discussion here especially when it involves the office of the President of the United States. We try to look at both sides. Since I worked in advertising in a previous life, we tend to examine staging as well as content.

[Debbie in OR]

Hm, this approach confuses me a bit. I understand not wanting to encourage your children to idolize people whose lifestyle and beliefs undermine your own convictions (and in not watching TV on a regular basis, clearly you're being consistent in that goal).

 

However, how will you feel about your children going to college? Having a job? Because at some point, your kids are going to have an authority whose belief systems collide with theirs. I have observed a handful of Christian young adults who can not hold down a job because every time they discover that their boss drinks/smokes/mows the lawn on Sunday -- they quit, saying they can't work for someone so ungodly.

 

At some point, your children may have a boss or a commanding officer or a supervisor who has had an abortion, or who supports the availability of abortion. Are they going to have a problem respecting that person's office and authority? Would you discourage them from listening to anything that anyone has to say, whose belief system does not match your own? I'm just not seeing how that works in the real world, and I'd go so far to say that I'd be a little nervous about what's going to happen when they are no longer under your watchful eye. (Not you/your just directed at you, specifically -- in general, folks who would take the same approach, clearly you are not alone in your point of view.)

 

OF COURSE, it goes without saying that if you don't care to watch a speech, you certainly don't need to, and gracious, you don't need to explain to me why. :) But the reason of "he has lost all credibility as a role model", just sort of jumped out at me, again -- in the *context* of what I'm observing with some young adults IRL. I'm just not seeing the connection between the suitability of a President as a personal role model for my children (which, incidentally, I agree -- I would not choose President Obama to be my children's role model) and whether or not to watch a speech (which I would choose to use as an opportunity for discussion, including those very important points at which I disagree with the President).

 

I'm thinking and wondering aloud, not questioning or challenging your authority as a parent, I hope that comes across.

 

I hear what you are saying, and I suppose it would be easy to assume we shelter our kids in general. However, I see what you are talking about and my choice to not have Obama be a role model for my kids as apples and oranges.

 

We have never shied away from "being in the world, not of it"; as a matter of fact, we are big believers in having them spread their wings now while we can help guide them so that they won't fall apart when they leave. We discuss, discuss, discuss everything. And I do mean everything. I am amazed at the conversations we have sometimes! For instance, my kids can tell you more about evolution than many adults! And we always leave things open-ended for them to draw their own conclusions. If they are not presented with both sides of things, they can not make sound decisions for themselves. We know this. They are free to question and believe differently than their dad and I...and they know that. ETA: A generous relative offered to pay for our kids to go to the private Christian school here, and for several reasons, we declined. One of the main reasons for that was our concern that our kids would only be exposed to one side of the issues; that there would not be the freedom to question or discuss controversial things (which, of course, is absolutely their prerogative). One of the reasons I love homeschooling is because we can just throw all the ideas, thoughts, theories, suppositions, etc...out on the table and sift through it, making them our own. I never felt free to question my parents' beliefs, although they may have been fine with it, I don't know. But I love that our kids have that freedom to push those boundaries with us. But having the freedom to question those things and purposely setting someone in the role of model are two different things.

 

Also, our kids have close friends who are secular and *gasp* whose parents voted for Obama. :001_smile: And they adore each other. But they are peers, not role-models.

 

So, to have my kids listen to Obama address kids, apparently in an attempt to look to him as a role model ("see, if you work hard, you, too can do great things, etc..."), is a totally separate issue. It would be like taking investment advice from someone you know has taken liberties with the rules and works them in his favor. If he doesn't hold to your own standards of truthfulness, why would you take advice from him? If Obama's values are such that he is ok with his daughters having an abortion, it is obvious our value systems are miles apart...why would I want my kids to think of him as a role model?

Edited September 4, 2009 by Debbie in OR
Added more information

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

So, to have my kids listen to Obama address kids, apparently in an attempt to look to him as a role model ("see, if you work hard, you, too can do great things, etc..."), is a totally separate issue. It would be like taking investment advice from someone you know has taken liberties with the rules and works them in his favor. If he doesn't hold to your own standards of truthfulness, why would you take advice from him? If Obama's values are such that he is ok with his daughters having an abortion, it is obvious our value systems are miles apart...why would I want my kids to think of him as a role model?

 

Wow. I am shocked. I see President Obama as having integrity. I have seen no documentation of him being dishonest or anything of the kind. He may have different opinions than you as well as myself but that does not make him dishonest or unworthy of respect as President of the U.S. or as a human being. Geesh.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Also for what it is worth, I saw President Bush as a man of integrity as well even though I disagreed with many of his policies.

[sadiegirl]

I'll wait and watch what O'Reilly and Glenn Beck have to say about the speech. I trust them more and agree wit their views.

Aside from the fact of whether or not you agree with the President...I do not think that he should be taking the time of our schools to speak with our kids. It's as if he is doing this way in order to have a "captive audience"...most politicians don't get my attention during speeches as I think alot of it is just words...

[lionfamily1999]

Wow. I am shocked. I see President Obama as having integrity. I have seen no documentation of him being dishonest or anything of the kind. He may have different opinions than you as well as myself but that does not make him dishonest or unworthy of respect as President of the U.S. or as a human being. Geesh.

For some, that particular issue would extend well beyond differing opinions. IOW, if you were to see that as murder and the idea of that being available to minors without their parental consent as stepping into the parental realm (or allowing a child to do contrary to their parents and protecting that action by law), then you could see Obama as a person who either condones murder, or believes that parents cannot be expected to do what is best for their child, therefore setting the government in the position where they, not the parents, can allow actions regardless of the parents' wishes.

 

If you see it from those views, questioning his integrity (or else, denying him any) is ... I'm not sure that understandable would be the right word, but hopefully, you know what I mean.

[Debbie in OR]

Wow. I am shocked. I see President Obama as having integrity. I have seen no documentation of him being dishonest or anything of the kind. He may have different opinions than you as well as myself but that does not make him dishonest or unworthy of respect as President of the U.S. or as a human being. Geesh.

 

 

I didn't say Obama was dishonest. I was using a generic example of not taking counsel or using as a role model someone who had obviously different values than yourself. The example was just that...an example. My point was if you know someone has very different values than your own (abortion, in this case), I would not want that person to be a role model for my kids.

Edited September 4, 2009 by Debbie in OR

[Kim in Appalachia]

It would have to be something major for me to turn the tv on and stop school.

[Philothea]

We won't be watching or listening. I believe the Federal Government should stay out of the education business and stay away from my children. I certainly do not belive that any politician should be using the public schools as a medium to push their agenda. If schools are going to be secular and leave out certain worldviews and religions from their buildings, they should omit the Liberal religion, values, and morals along with the traditional and Conservative counterparts that have already been cast aside or made illegal.

 

I certainly hope parents will keep their children home from school or that the students will be given the opportunity to opt out.

[mommaduck]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20090903/pl_ynews/ynews_pl888_1

[lionfamily1999]

Mamma duck, I read the DOE thing (for K-6) and I really don't see the problem. It's actually pretty lame, but I mean, they do that for anything in school. It's not as though they sit down after any assembly and ask the kids to pick it apart. They spoon feed them the information and then make sure everyone swallowed it. That's just what they do.

[Mrs Mungo]

I'll wait and watch what O'Reilly and Glenn Beck have to say about the speech.

 

:blink:

[babysparkler]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20090903/pl_ynews/ynews_pl888_1

 

Jim Greer, the chairman of the Republican Party of Florida, came out swinging against the planned speech. An excerpt from his statement:

"The address scheduled for September 8, 2009, does not allow for healthy debate on the President's agenda, but rather obligates the youngest children in our public school system to agree with our President's initiatives or be ostracized by their teachers and classmates."

:iagree:

[justamouse]

My sisters and I played a drinking game during the last presidential debate. We were only drinking on maverick, Joe the plumber, POW and earmark. We had to stop early though, we don't drink to excess.

 

 

Heh-that's the one we did, too. Although we added 'team of mavericks'.

[Ferdie]

I voted no because we don't have a TV. Otherwise we would probably watch it.

[mommaduck]

Mamma duck, I read the DOE thing (for K-6) and I really don't see the problem. It's actually pretty lame, but I mean, they do that for anything in school. It's not as though they sit down after any assembly and ask the kids to pick it apart. They spoon feed them the information and then make sure everyone swallowed it. That's just what they do.

And that's the issue.

[lionfamily1999]

But it's not just Obama (that was my point). It is each and every subject they introduce in school. The answers, the info. is not up for argument. Gosh, if they let the kids disagree with this, what would they do if the kids disagree about a particular method in math, or an OPINION in science.

 

Pinning it all on one Obama speech is, imo, disengenuous (and if you can't read that word, I'm sorry, but it's a crap day and I don't feel like looking up proper spelling).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh, and look: It's a car PULLING into a driveway :auto:

[Christy B]

Christy B, my dh does not work for dishonest people. He has quit jobs, because his boss, supervisor, or even the owner of the business has proven to be a liar/thief/etc. This has not worked to our disadvantage. He now works for an honest man. While times are hard, there is still the benefit of knowing that you are earning money for someone you respect. I have quit jobs for the same sorts of reasons. At one point, I found out my supervisor (at a job I loved) was a filanderer. I quit. Now, I miss the job itself, but I could not have worked for or with him, knowing the kind of person he is.

 

You can choose with whom you work and who you earn money for. It doesn't prove impossible, and when those things are important to you, then the rewards are beyond any losses.

 

My point was if you know someone has very different values than your own (abortion, in this case), I would not want that person to be a role model for my kids.

 

 

 

Debbie, thank you for your thoughtful response. I thoroughly disagree that it is necessary or even advisable to quit a job simply because you do not agree with your superior's lifestyle or moral code, insofar as their choices do not negatively impact your job or your ability to carry it out. I respect the consistency of your point of view and the remarkable way in which you've followed through on your convictions.

 

That said. ;)

 

You can indeed choose with whom you work and who you earn money for. *At this point in time* we have no choice as to who our President is. The President is the President, and he's giving a speech. Despite your thoughtful explanations, I still don't see this if/then scenario of watching the President give a speech automatically resulting in the President becoming a role model.

 

It's an apples and oranges thing (from my point of view). The fact that someone gives a speech does not make them a role model. The Pope's world view is very different from my own, and he gives speeches all the time; if I watch him on CNN, that does not make me Catholic. Sarah Palin has values very different than my own; she gave lots of speeches and watching her give a speech did not make her my girls' role model (though they did adopt her trademark "you betcha"; maybe I shouldn't have let them watch . . . KIDDING . . . sort of :D) My staunchly Republican husband took the day off from work to take us to see Senator Hillary Clinton give a speech when she came to our home town; she did not become my girls' role model -- it was simply an opportunity for our girls to witness the political process and show respect for one of our nation's public servants who was taking time to stop in our little town.

 

I understand where you're coming from, I just don't understand where you arrive. But as a dear friend of mine said to me the other day, I will fight beside you to the end to defend your right to hold your own convictions.

[Christy B]

ETA: A generous relative offered to pay for our kids to go to the private Christian school here, and for several reasons, we declined. One of the main reasons for that was our concern that our kids would only be exposed to one side of the issues; that there would not be the freedom to question or discuss controversial things (which, of course, is absolutely their prerogative).

 

Also, our kids have close friends who are secular and *gasp* whose parents voted for Obama. :001_smile: And they adore each other. But they are peers, not role-models.

 

 

 

Oh, I totally get you here -- we did send our older dd to a Christian school last year. I'm telling you, the one-sided, self-righteous, intolerable attitude with which they presented things made us furious (and that was with the issues on which we AGREED, lol!). Like you say, their school, their prerogative. Our tuition, which now they don't get. :tongue_smilie:

 

My kids have close friends (okay, every single friend they know) whose parents *gasp* voted for McCain. :D They are peers, but I would also consider the parents role-models -- I may not agree with them politically but they are people of integrity and we share the same moral and religious values. My question would be, how do you feel about the *parents* of your children's friends? Would you take issue with them having any sort of relationship or influence with your children? I'm sincerely curious if you feel you need to "protect" (for lack of a better word) your children from their political views -- or if you have a relationship with the families of mutual respect to not "go there" with each other's kids. (See, you're starting to make me wonder how my kids friends parents think of me! Now I'm going to have a complex . . . "yeah, those kids are great but keep away from the mom, she's a whack-job who doesn't vote Republican . . . ":lol:)

[Christy B]

Debbie, thank you for your thoughtful response. I thoroughly disagree that it is necessary or even advisable to quit a job simply because you do not agree with your superior's lifestyle or moral code, insofar as their choices do not negatively impact your job or your ability to carry it out. I respect the consistency of your point of view and the remarkable way in which you've followed through on your convictions.

 

That said. ;)

 

You can indeed choose with whom you work and who you earn money for. *At this point in time* we have no choice as to who our President is. The President is the President, and he's giving a speech. Despite your thoughtful explanations, I still don't see this if/then scenario of watching the President give a speech automatically resulting in the President becoming a role model.

 

It's an apples and oranges thing (from my point of view). The fact that someone gives a speech does not make them a role model. The Pope's world view is very different from my own, and he gives speeches all the time; if I watch him on CNN, that does not make me Catholic. Sarah Palin has values very different than my own; she gave lots of speeches and watching her give a speech did not make her my girls' role model (though they did adopt her trademark "you betcha"; maybe I shouldn't have let them watch . . . KIDDING . . . sort of :D) My staunchly Republican husband took the day off from work to take us to see Senator Hillary Clinton give a speech when she came to our home town; she did not become my girls' role model -- it was simply an opportunity for our girls to witness the political process and show respect for one of our nation's public servants who was taking time to stop in our little town.

 

I understand where you're coming from, I just don't understand where you arrive. But as a dear friend of mine said to me the other day, I will fight beside you to the end to defend your right to hold your own convictions.

 

Okay, I just realized that I totally mixed up Debbie's response with someone else; my apologies for not paying more attention to whom I was responding.

[Remudamom]

Don't ya'll remember that teacher that bullied the poor kid who didn't want to vote for Obama? That'll be played over and over with this speech. It's a cheap, crappie move. My kids wouldn't attend ps that day, if they did attend, which they don't.

 

Obviously we won't watch. I don't want to kick in my tv. Which I would.

[lionfamily1999]

Debbie, thank you for your thoughtful response. I thoroughly disagree that it is necessary or even advisable to quit a job simply because you do not agree with your superior's lifestyle or moral code, insofar as their choices do not negatively impact your job or your ability to carry it out. I respect the consistency of your point of view and the remarkable way in which you've followed through on your convictions.

 

That said. ;)

 

Not Debbie ;) Julie

 

I was responding to your concerns that children will not be able to function in a world where the personal stances or behaviors of their superiors run contrary to their own. That said... I will only respond to the first part of your response, it seems the rest was intended for Debbie, not myself.

 

No one HAS to quit a job because they don't agree with the morals, etc. of their bosses, the owners, their supervisors, etc. However, for those that feel that strong morals are very important, and supporting those morals in others equally important, it would be important to do so. IOW, I strongly believe that supporting a person with questionable/contrary to my own morals equates with supporting their chosen lifestyle, thus I would not work for someone or an entity with questionable/contrary to my own morals. I would be shocked by a PETA supporter working in a slaughter house. Imo, you profess these beliefs (not you, but our hypothetical PETA person), and yet you support the very industry you rail against? I, then, could not really believe that person supports PETA whole heartedly, else they would find a way more compatable with their moral values.

 

Then, could that same person work with someone who is constantly wearing leather? I would equate that with a hostile working environment. Not something to go to court about, but definitely something for that person of those convictions to take into account when they're dragging themselves back into work to the coworker they find morally abhorrent. Working next to someone whose views are so directly contrary does not make for a happy working environment. An unhappy working environment leads to despising your job. So, then every morning it's drugery in a place you hate, why? Because you feel morally convicted that this person is part of the problem, but you can't do anything about it (and I have NO problem with that), because it's the work place.

 

In my opinion, the best solution is to leave. Not go storming out, but turn in notice and find a place better suited to your belief system. Not everyone would want to do that, but it can be done.

[Scuff]

I voted no, but then thought about it a little and would probably change it to Tivo. It is current events of the day, and an opportunity to discuss the speach with the kiddos. So if I had the energy, it may be a positive thing to not ignore it. Haven't read the last 8 pages of debate :)

[texascamps]

In this time of economic turmoil, the accountant in me can't stand the thought of the thousands of man hours and advertising dollars and lawyer hours spent on this............

 

for a speech to kids......Can't they take that same 10 mill and go........build all new low flow toilets in the national parks instead? or something?

 

Personally, I like to maintain the majesty and brilliance of the office of Pesident of the US. But every time that man talks, I just get embarressed for him......

 

I guess I'll TEVO it and see what he says. My older kids are wise.

[BigMamaBird]

I'm not planning on watching. It's not that I have anything against the President, it's just that the subject matter is irrelevant to our family. We're homeschoolers, if you drop out of this school you better find a new place to eat and sleep.

[babysparkler]

Don't ya'll remember that teacher that bullied the poor kid who didn't want to vote for Obama? That'll be played over and over with this speech. It's a cheap, crappie move. My kids wouldn't attend ps that day, if they did attend, which they don't.

 

Obviously we won't watch. I don't want to kick in my tv. Which I would.

 

My dd7 was harrassed constantly during the election b/c she was the only white child in her class of 22 kids. They made fun of her and told her that she couldn't vote for Obama in the class election because she was white and rubbed it into her face when he won. Needless to say, I am happy to have her homeschooling this year!

[tricia]

Not here. I/We have better things to do with our time.:tongue_smilie:

[silvermine]

I'm not planning on watching. It's not that I have anything against the President, it's just that the subject matter is irrelevant to our family. We're homeschoolers, if you drop out of this school you better find a new place to eat and sleep.

 

LOL! Yeah, I can't imagine a presidential address to school kids really having much to do with us.

[Debbie in OR]

(See, you're starting to make me wonder how my kids friends parents think of me! Now I'm going to have a complex . . . "yeah, those kids are great but keep away from the mom, she's a whack-job who doesn't vote Republican . . . ":lol:)

 

:lol:

 

(I'm headed out of town for the long weekend so I don't have time to respond but I will think about your questions and try to answer when we get back.:001_smile:

[Joker]

Yes, we'll watch. We didn't vote for Obama but my dh took the day off for election day and inaugaration day. My dd's were involved and understand that the election process and the Presidency is something special. We will listen to what he has to say and then we will discuss it together. I will admit that I might have a problem if they were in ps. I may not want them to watch it and then be directed by their teachers. I want the discussions to be with me or dh.

[TXMary2]

Thank goodness the word "change" wasn't part of the game...that would take ya'll about 5 minutes before you'd be stumbling around.

 

 

LOL- or "Hope" or "Let me be clear"

[Slartibartfast]

I do plan on watching it.

 

I watched President Bush's speeches as well.

 

 

 

I like to watch things for myself and form my own opinions rather than let someone else tell me what to think. I also want my dd to think for herself.

Edited September 5, 2009 by Sis

[Peek a Boo]

My sisters and I played a drinking game during the last presidential debate. We were only drinking on maverick, Joe the plumber, POW and earmark. We had to stop early though, we don't drink to excess.

 

OMG --if I ever hear MAVERICK again i'm gonna puke.:ack2:

 

See now Peek and Mungo I thought you guys were playing over on the slide but you've moved over to the sand box. I'll share my toys with both of you but you'll each have to bring your own shovel, ya know for the digs. :D

 

Sorry I couldn't resist ... please forgive....just trying to lighten the day. :D

 

LOL! no problem here-- i didn't vote for McCain. ;)

 

 

I like to watch things for myself and form my own opinions rather than let someone else tell me what to think. I also want my dd to think for herself.

 

ayup. But after watching and listening, I always appreciate it if someone else catches something that i didn't. Group discussion is pretty important for that reason. ;)

[Hockey Mom]

We don't usually watch him when he makes a speech. We did at first, but he tends to talk in general terms without much substance. I can't stand it, and neither can dh. So, no. There really isn't much point. As I see it, it's a waste of school time.

:iagree:

[tdeveson]

Wow. I am shocked. I see President Obama as having integrity. I have seen no documentation of him being dishonest or anything of the kind. He may have different opinions than you as well as myself but that does not make him dishonest or unworthy of respect as President of the U.S. or as a human being. Geesh.

 

Many people do not need any evidence to label the president as dishonest or unworthy. Rush Limbaugh tells them what their opinion is and there is no reason for independent thinking. Consider that polls show that for the past 8 years, the GOP has become less educated, older, more rural, more "born again," more Southern, and of course, more white.

 

For the first time this past election, the GOP did not have the vote of 4-year-college graduates. The Dems always had the grad school graduates, but this year they took all the college demographics. Extraordinarily educated people tend to be Democrats. You can take that any way you want, but them's the numbers.

 

Food for thought.

Edited September 5, 2009 by tdeveson

[mommaduck]

Extraordinarily educated people tend to be Democrats. You can take that any way you want, but them's the numbers.

 

Food for thought.

Yep, you showed me *snark* :glare:

 

I've found the opposite. That it is often split. And those that aren't toting simply what they are told are Independents ;)

[DawnM]

I actually think peole can be role models for different things.....I can think of very few people I would tell my children to emulate completely!

 

Most people have some flaws but have some things worthy of following too. I want my own children to be able to sift through and see what is of character and what isn't.

 

We can admire those who work with the poor and downtrodden, even if they don't do it 100% the way we would do it. Servitude is certainly something we value.

 

Obama has done some great things and some things I don't agree with him on.....same as Bush......but my kids have listened to Bush speeches and have listened to Obama speeches.

 

We may or may not watch.....if it comes on early here I might.....we are on vacation and I am not coming back to the hotel mid-day to watch. If it is on in the am before we leave I will watch, but I am sure I can catch it online later if I miss it. I do plan to catch it somehow just so I can see what all the controvery is about! So far I don't see it.

 

Dawn

 

 

I hear what you are saying, and I suppose it would be easy to assume we shelter our kids in general. However, I see what you are talking about and my choice to not have Obama be a role model for my kids as apples and oranges.

 

We have never shied away from "being in the world, not of it"; as a matter of fact, we are big believers in having them spread their wings now while we can help guide them so that they won't fall apart when they leave. We discuss, discuss, discuss everything. And I do mean everything. I am amazed at the conversations we have sometimes! For instance, my kids can tell you more about evolution than many adults! And we always leave things open-ended for them to draw their own conclusions. If they are not presented with both sides of things, they can not make sound decisions for themselves. We know this. They are free to question and believe differently than their dad and I...and they know that. ETA: A generous relative offered to pay for our kids to go to the private Christian school here, and for several reasons, we declined. One of the main reasons for that was our concern that our kids would only be exposed to one side of the issues; that there would not be the freedom to question or discuss controversial things (which, of course, is absolutely their prerogative). One of the reasons I love homeschooling is because we can just throw all the ideas, thoughts, theories, suppositions, etc...out on the table and sift through it, making them our own. I never felt free to question my parents' beliefs, although they may have been fine with it, I don't know. But I love that our kids have that freedom to push those boundaries with us. But having the freedom to question those things and purposely setting someone in the role of model are two different things.

 

Also, our kids have close friends who are secular and *gasp* whose parents voted for Obama. :001_smile: And they adore each other. But they are peers, not role-models.

 

So, to have my kids listen to Obama address kids, apparently in an attempt to look to him as a role model ("see, if you work hard, you, too can do great things, etc..."), is a totally separate issue. It would be like taking investment advice from someone you know has taken liberties with the rules and works them in his favor. If he doesn't hold to your own standards of truthfulness, why would you take advice from him? If Obama's values are such that he is ok with his daughters having an abortion, it is obvious our value systems are miles apart...why would I want my kids to think of him as a role model?

[Melinda in VT]

I actually think peole can be role models for different things.....I can think of very few people I would tell my children to emulate completely!

 

Most people have some flaws but have some things worthy of following too. I want my own children to be able to sift through and see what is of character and what isn't.

 

We can admire those who work with the poor and downtrodden, even if they don't do it 100% the way we would do it. Servitude is certainly something we value.

 

Obama has done some great things and some things I don't agree with him on.....same as Bush......but my kids have listened to Bush speeches and have listened to Obama speeches.

 

We may or may not watch.....if it comes on early here I might.....we are on vacation and I am not coming back to the hotel mid-day to watch. If it is on in the am before we leave I will watch, but I am sure I can catch it online later if I miss it. I do plan to catch it somehow just so I can see what all the controvery is about! So far I don't see it.

 

Dawn

 

:iagree:

 

None of us are perfect, and I don't think we're doing ourselves or our kids a favor if we teach them the only role models worth having are those who lack vices.

 

Often those who have great strengths in one area have correspondingly great weaknesses in another.

[theresatwist]

Many people do not need any evidence to label the president as dishonest or unworthy. Rush Limbaugh tells them what their opinion is and there is no reason for independent thinking. Consider that polls show that for the past 8 years, the GOP has become less educated, older, more rural, more "born again," more Southern, and of course, more white.

 

For the first time this past election, the GOP did not have the vote of 4-year-college graduates. The Dems always had the grad school graduates, but this year they took all the college demographics. Extraordinarily educated people tend to be Democrats. You can take that any way you want, but them's the numbers.

 

Food for thought.

 

I've seen the statistics you're referring to and I find that interesting as well. (When so much of your rhetoric is anti-"elite" it seems to me you shouldn't be surprised by this result.) However, I think it's also important to mention that there are an incredibly large number of uninformed voters in both parties. Having received a traditional education does not mean you are necessarily an informed voter. The number of people who don't read the news and don't have a grasp of basic civics is pretty darn scary.

[Peek a Boo]

Many people do not need any evidence to label the president as dishonest or unworthy. Rush Limbaugh tells them what their opinion is and there is no reason for independent thinking. Consider that polls show that for the past 8 years, the GOP has become less educated, older, more rural, more "born again," more Southern, and of course, more white.

 

For the first time this past election, the GOP did not have the vote of 4-year-college graduates. The Dems always had the grad school graduates, but this year they took all the college demographics. Extraordinarily educated people tend to be Democrats. You can take that any way you want, but them's the numbers.

 

Food for thought.

 

and then there are people who assume that a 4-year grad is actually educated. ;)

 

and some people actually place quite a bit of credibility in polls instead of deciding for themselves whether an action is good, right, or ethical.

 

i don't find people that are willing to kill a human on demand for convenience with no due process or legal consequence to be someone worthy of immediate trust or respect. i find his record in the senate and as President to be less than honorable. But Rush didn't tell me that -- there's plenty of discussion about it right here on the board archives :)

 

however, i do understand that some supposedly educated people tend to dismiss any anti-Obama sentiment as Rush-driven.

back to my first point.

 

and then there's that little point that a buncha "educated" people can't seem to set up a private healthcare plan to voluntarily cover the uninsured people in America w/o resorting to stealing from others.

So much for education.

[Tree House Academy]

I am pretty sure that the "goal" of this whole thing is NOT what he will say to the kids on Sept.8, but moreso the fact that a majority of elementary schools across the country will be studying HIM for days and days leading up to the speech. :glare:

Edited September 5, 2009 by Tree House Academy

[momto2Cs]

My kids are really excited that the President will be talking TO kids, so absolutely yes, we will be watching it. Even though they are not "in" school and he's telling kids to stay in school, I think it will be more than that - a pep talk from someone who has obviously worked hard and gotten somewhere as a result. And since he is a father of kids similar in age to mine, I assume he does know how to talk to kids.

Edited September 5, 2009 by momto2Cs
spelling

[theresatwist]

I am pretty sure that the "goal" of this whole thing is NOT what he will say to the kids on Sept.8, but moreso the fact that a majority of elementary schools across the country will be studying HIM for days and days leading up to the speech. :glare:

 

Did you think that when Reagan addressed school children? I'm just curious.

 

I remember writing letter to the first President Bush when I was in elementary school. We were supposed to write him with our recommendations! I thought it was really exciting at the time and about a year later I actually received a letter back, with a photo, that I still have. Now I come from a family of bleeding heart liberals. But, I don't think at the age of 8 or 9 I saw it as a political exercise at all. I was just so excited to be interacting in any form with somebody so important.

[Bee]

Unless something really important is happening. An inspirational speech from the president (whoever he is) isn't going to motivate my children to do any better at their schoolwork. Frankly, I know my children would only want to watch because it would mean time spent not doing real school work. But we probably won't be home anyway.