The Absurd Report

As One Radical Agenda Item is Quelled More Are Sure to Surface

When I first learned that President Obama would be addressing our school children I was not overly concerned. I kind of brushed it off until I actually read the lesson plan. From that point on I became a fact filled parent on a mission to determine whether or not my school district was going to facilitate what I perceived as a blatant attempt to use the nation�s schools for the express purpose of furthering the liberal Democrat agenda.

I was only the second person last week to contact the Superintendent of our school district. It took some time and effort, repeated phone calls and a couple of e-mails that went unanswered but I never gave up. Although I never heard back from my child�s principal I did have many pleasant conversations with the assistants at the Superintendent�s office. Each time we spoke I was calm and had a full grasp of the facts. The first time I called they weren�t even aware of the controversy. That changed over time.

On Friday I finally received an answer. The Superintendent decided that no school in our child�s school district would be participating in the speech or lesson plan. Other districts that did televise the speech witnessed a speech that was conservative in tone. The President even mentioned God in a school setting. Had that been any Republican President you can be assured that it would have been met with wails. So as liberals across the nation try to squeeze a victory out of defeat you can rest assured that the victory was ours.

This is a small win. Unfortunately it is not over by a long shot. Let me explain why.

I am not opposed to this President or any other addressing our children with a positive message about staying in school and working toward bettering themselves through education. Unfortunately the Department of Education as led by Arne Duncan seemed to have missed that charter this time around. We could see plain as day that this was an underhanded attempt to put our children on the path of one particular ideological train of thought. From the moment teachers were instructed to lead the the nation�s children down a path toward explaining how they could help the President the foundation was set. Teachers now had the go ahead to explain to their students what the President was trying to achieve. Happy phrases from the campaign trial could now be taught from the front of the classroom. Hope and Change could have been the phrase of the week, Health Care could have been the new cause and Climate Change could have been the new action item.

Make no mistake. Those specific messages were not spelled out in the lesson plan but middle school children could not be given such a grand assignment without some context. How else could children as young as 4 years old be expected to think about helping Barack Obama unless they were instructed on what it is that he is trying to achieve?

Had we not been vigilant our children could have been pawns in a game of undermine the conservative parent.

But liberal Democrats don�t stop at one defeat. They keep on trying.

As exhibit �A� I�d like to look at an appointment made by Arne Duncan through the eyes of the media that reports on him. Duncan, a close personal friend of Barack Obama, is the former Chicago Public Schools CEO that has been appointed as the Secretary of Education by the President. Thus it will come as no surprise that Time magazine described Duncan in an article that begins with the phrase �A willingness to compromise.� Coincidentally, or not, The New York Times also described Duncan in the same manner, as a �compromise choice.�

This is a media lie; a homespun yarn that is standard fare for a media that just can�t bring themselves to be honest when it comes to reporting on the President and his friends. When the media portrays a liberal in the light of compromise it is almost always a misnomer, a red flag that should be interpreted as covert.

For example. Many reading this blog are probably aware that Mr. Duncan proposed a gay high school in Chicago. The idea was pushed under the guise of social justice. Apparently a study was done somewhere that shows gay students are subjected to an environment of intolerance and feel threatened and bullied as a result. Thus the need for a gay friendly school. There is no word if the same study was done for religious students, those in the math club, band or any other of the many groups that might possibly feel out of place or threatened in school. The difference is that of all the groups I just mentioned gays are granted favorable status by Democrats in office. (the same Democrats that wouldn�t think of doing the same for religious groups)

For obvious reasons the proposed plan to create a gay friendly school came under attack by various groups and was scuttled with the aim of being resurrected in 2010 under a more general umbrella as a refuge for bullied youths of all persuasions.

Read more from Bookworm Room

1 Comment »

Trackback URI | Comments RSS