President Obama's Speech

**CivilWars** · 09-09-09, 12:56 PM

Still not news....
but in other reports TTP has received over 1220 page views on this topic alone. Thanks.

**Thorsen** · 09-09-09, 01:02 PM

Originally Posted by hawgballs

Originally Posted by [SWC

Erik Thorsen ]
Well you've straw-manned my position Hawg. I didn't say we should restrict who goes in to guest speak at classes. I said we should allow parents to remove their children from the class during the those occasions that they feel so inclined as long as it isn't due to conflicts with the established curriculum. Like I have said multiple times already. I would have allowed my children to watch the speech, I thought it was rather fluffy and not all the interesting, but perfectly harmless. That isn't the point. The point is, is that if I were say a devout Christian, I would wish to reserve the right to remove my children from class if say a Wiccan was going to guest speak. To reiterate, parents should have a choice when it comes to extra curricular activities presented in public schools.

But it wasn't a Wiccan we are talking about here, it is the president. And like I said, you would want permission for your kids to opt out of "officer friendly", if parents were to apply the same standards that you have set out for the president's address.

Yeah I do think parents should be able to remove their children from "Officer Friendly" so long as he is not an official part of school of the school curriculum. Would parents do that? I can't see most parents opting out of something like officer friendly. But that point is moot. Let me put it this way. What if someone was going to speak at your child's school on how making napalm is way cool and a good idea. Of course you'd want to opt out of that. Of course making napalm is nothing like being told to do good in school right? But the principle of "This speaker is saying things that sound bad/dangerous to me, or I expect him to say these things. Therefore, I will opt out of it." remains the same. Who are you to judge what is or is not offensive to someone else? When you said "But it isn't a Wiccan we are talking about." Do you realize that to a Wiccan that would be just as harmless as the president seems to us?

So what do you propose? That any speaker who doesn't offend you is ok? Or maybe any speaker who doesn't offend the majority? How is that fair? Why not let everyone have a chance to speak, and let everyone else decide whether or not they want to listen.

**Xoria** · 09-09-09, 01:48 PM

I may not agree with the Obama-haters..but I can say I'm glad one silly line of rhetoric has stopped...

everyone's exercising their right to free speech and not claiming its un-American or treasonous to criticize the POTUS while we're at war....

thank gods for that at least :P

Idealogy and rhetoric aside, they're all politicians..and they will act as such.

**BruceBloodMaster** · 09-09-09, 02:50 PM

Meh...... Obama just wanted to get on tv AGAIN ! However I think most of you Missed the part about Obama wanting the kids to write an essay about " how you could help Pres Obama" which was Dropped from the speech because of the "outrage".
Obama just loves being on TV ........... more than any other President in history. I guess that'll be his one great Guiness record.

**Consultant** · 09-09-09, 02:57 PM

I saw it on Youtube and thought it was a good speech. Talked about personal responsibility and working hard...if these kids don't have parents in their lives to deliver this message, perhaps the President (whoever that may be) can inspire and motivate them.

I didnt see anything partisan or evil in the speech at all.

**CallousDisregard** · 09-09-09, 03:01 PM

Originally Posted by Consultant

I saw it on Youtube and thought it was a good speech. Talked about personal responsibility and working hard...if these kids don't have parents in their lives to deliver this message, perhaps the President (whoever that may be) can inspire and motivate them.

I didnt see anything partisan or evil in the speech at all.

Do you believe that the tone of the speech was altered by the public outcry ?

**Consultant** · 09-09-09, 03:14 PM

If it was, good.

If it wasn't, we'll never know.

I think it is irrelevant. I don't really see where he could have interjected more of his policy propaganda. It wasn't that kind of speech at all.

On second thought...I dont see how it is relevant even if it was. I just re-watched the speech and had zero problems with it.

Government's roll is to provide for it's citizens those things and services that cannot be had at a better return on investment in the private market. National defense, law enforcement, currency management, etc. Public education fits in that category as well. Some people opt out and put their kids in private schools but that is the exception. I think it was a good speech...nay, it was a great speech.

Nobody can knock him on that...the man can talk.

**CallousDisregard** · 09-09-09, 03:28 PM

I don't the speech was relevant, nor would it have been even if he did leave in the part about " how you can help President Obama".
The relevance is in the protests themselves and how widespread they were.
I think it is glaringly obvious that he does not have "mandate" from the people and the resistance to many of his programs and views is broader than just the "right" or Republicans.

**Consultant** · 09-09-09, 03:32 PM

Originally Posted by CallousDisregard

I don't the speech was relevant, nor would it have been even if he did leave in the part about " how you can help President Obama".
The relevance is in the protests themselves and how widespread they were.
I think it is glaringly obvious that he does not have "mandate" from the people and the resistance to many of his programs and views is broader than just the "right" or Republicans.

His drooping poll numbers would support that statement. He's losing favor in every group. (except school-aged kids I bet)

**~~hawgballs~~** · 09-09-09, 04:55 PM

Originally Posted by [SWC

Erik Thorsen ]

Originally Posted by hawgballs

Originally Posted by [SWC

Erik Thorsen ]
Well you've straw-manned my position Hawg. I didn't say we should restrict who goes in to guest speak at classes. I said we should allow parents to remove their children from the class during the those occasions that they feel so inclined as long as it isn't due to conflicts with the established curriculum. Like I have said multiple times already. I would have allowed my children to watch the speech, I thought it was rather fluffy and not all the interesting, but perfectly harmless. That isn't the point. The point is, is that if I were say a devout Christian, I would wish to reserve the right to remove my children from class if say a Wiccan was going to guest speak. To reiterate, parents should have a choice when it comes to extra curricular activities presented in public schools.

But it wasn't a Wiccan we are talking about here, it is the president. And like I said, you would want permission for your kids to opt out of "officer friendly", if parents were to apply the same standards that you have set out for the president's address.

Yeah I do think parents should be able to remove their children from "Officer Friendly" so long as he is not an official part of school of the school curriculum. Would parents do that? I can't see most parents opting out of something like officer friendly. But that point is moot. Let me put it this way. What if someone was going to speak at your child's school on how making napalm is way cool and a good idea. Of course you'd want to opt out of that. Of course making napalm is nothing like being told to do good in school right? But the principle of "This speaker is saying things that sound bad/dangerous to me, or I expect him to say these things. Therefore, I will opt out of it." remains the same. Who are you to judge what is or is not offensive to someone else? When you said "But it isn't a Wiccan we are talking about." Do you realize that to a Wiccan that would be just as harmless as the president seems to us?

What do I propose? I propose using common sense. It is the fucking President of the United States, who spoke about staying in school. How can one be offended? And how can you compare a sitting President to someone that is preaching on "how making napalm is way cool and a good idea". You are stretching to draw parallels that don't even exist. Like I asked before, did you think he was going to whip out his cock as soon as he knew all eyes were on him, as if he were the new Sheriff of Rock Ridge?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYlDbv7MqE8

Originally Posted by [SWC

Erik Thorsen ]
So what do you propose? That any speaker who doesn't offend you is ok? Or maybe any speaker who doesn't offend the majority? How is that fair? Why not let everyone have a chance to speak, and let everyone else decide whether or not they want to listen.

Please explain to me how the president offends by telling children that it is important to attend school, study.