Secondly, while parents should (and in most cases do) impart appropriate knowledge to their kids, part of that knowledge should also include how to process information received from 3rd parties. Shielding kids from all other sources of knowledge/information only makes them your thinking clones, right?

A politician's speech would be a good test for parents to make sure kids process the information the way parents want them to. So, maybe it's not all bad.

I disagree that “One of the reasons for that is the encouragement that in the USA, any dream is okay.” But I suspect schools often do a poor job communicating that “hard work, perseverance and determination” are what it takes to achieve those dreams (and also that you might fail). I think the lowering of standards is more to blame for the poor state of education here. But what can parents do if they cannot afford private schools?

My concern was less with the speech but the lesson plan promoted by the Dept. of Education. The President telling kids to stay in school and work hard is one thing, asking them to write letters explaining how they will help the Dear Leader accomplish HIS goals is something else altogether.

And, what was the content of the speech prior to the Dept. of Education retracting their lesson plan? Why wasn't that content released?

In the prepared remarks, Obama tells young people that all the work of parents, educators and others won't matter “unless you show up for those schools, pay attention to those teachers.”

In other words, if you don't read every last page of Jane Eyre, you kiddo are responsible for the next 9/11. Sleep on that, punk.

This is politics as usual with some going overboard, which seems to be the fad these days. Our children aren't going to be indoctrinated by this speech. They aren't going to turn into little socialists and keynesians. I think what this address does do is spur a little interest in our political system. Maybe you are doing what you can to teach your children the importance of education and taking interest in our government, but I'll wager that the majority of parents are not. So regardless of what you think of the man's political beliefs, I think this sort of general address to children shouldn't be feared.

Of course we know that was not what was intended in Obama's original idea and his pre-published and disseminated plan. That was highly charge with political orientation, so no I don't think Malkin over-reacted at all.

After spending 7 Mondays last spring teaching all day to Jr. High and HS students at a local HS, anything that would honestly inspire them enmasse would be a good thing. Encouraging children to dig into education without indoctrinating them in the conclusions they should draw from that education could only be a good thing.

I am with you all the way on keeping at bay anyone that would mess with my kids standards and morals.

Why do I stress standards and morals so much? Because without them you can be a liberal/socialist/democrat/communist/progressive (LSDCP) and a public sugar-tit sucker; with them you can be honest and individually productive.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/...

Jurors find it hard to tell right from wrong, says study Mark Henderson, Science Editor.

Though this is an article about the U.K. and done by a U.K. University, it applies to the USA just as much.

The LSDCP have been successful at their main goal; which was the destruction in the free world of standards and morals. And, it is not recent either, it was pretty much done by the end of the 1960s. (IMHO)

Secondly, while parents should (and in most cases do) impart appropriate knowledge to their kids, part of that knowledge should also include how to process information received from 3rd parties. Shielding kids from all other sources of knowledge/information only makes them your thinking clones, right?

A politician's speech would be a good test for parents to make sure kids process the information the way parents want them to. So, maybe it's not all bad.

I disagree that “One of the reasons for that is the encouragement that in the USA, any dream is okay.” But I suspect schools often do a poor job communicating that “hard work, perseverance and determination” are what it takes to achieve those dreams (and also that you might fail). I think the lowering of standards is more to blame for the poor state of education here. But what can parents do if they cannot afford private schools?

My concern was less with the speech but the lesson plan promoted by the Dept. of Education. The President telling kids to stay in school and work hard is one thing, asking them to write letters explaining how they will help the Dear Leader accomplish HIS goals is something else altogether.

And, what was the content of the speech prior to the Dept. of Education retracting their lesson plan? Why wasn't that content released?

In the prepared remarks, Obama tells young people that all the work of parents, educators and others won't matter “unless you show up for those schools, pay attention to those teachers.”

In other words, if you don't read every last page of Jane Eyre, you kiddo are responsible for the next 9/11. Sleep on that, punk.

This is politics as usual with some going overboard, which seems to be the fad these days. Our children aren't going to be indoctrinated by this speech. They aren't going to turn into little socialists and keynesians. I think what this address does do is spur a little interest in our political system. Maybe you are doing what you can to teach your children the importance of education and taking interest in our government, but I'll wager that the majority of parents are not. So regardless of what you think of the man's political beliefs, I think this sort of general address to children shouldn't be feared.

Of course we know that was not what was intended in Obama's original idea and his pre-published and disseminated plan. That was highly charge with political orientation, so no I don't think Malkin over-reacted at all.

After spending 7 Mondays last spring teaching all day to Jr. High and HS students at a local HS, anything that would honestly inspire them enmasse would be a good thing. Encouraging children to dig into education without indoctrinating them in the conclusions they should draw from that education could only be a good thing.

I am with you all the way on keeping at bay anyone that would mess with my kids standards and morals.

Why do I stress standards and morals so much? Because without them you can be a liberal/socialist/democrat/communist/progressive (LSDCP) and a public sugar-tit sucker; with them you can be honest and individually productive.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/...

Jurors find it hard to tell right from wrong, says study Mark Henderson, Science Editor.

Though this is an article about the U.K. and done by a U.K. University, it applies to the USA just as much.

The LSDCP have been successful at their main goal; which was the destruction in the free world of standards and morals. And, it is not recent either, it was pretty much done by the end of the 1960s. (IMHO)