Posted by unclehomerr.., a resident of the Downtown neighborhood, on Sep 4, 2009 at 3:57 pm
Many of the high school seniors, juniors, and sophomores in the suburbs.. and many of the 7th, 8th, and 9th graders in the inner cities.. will be first time voters in 2012. Why NOT start talking to them now?
Posted by concerned parent, a resident of the Country Fair neighborhood, on Sep 4, 2009 at 5:48 pm
Many Families are keeping their Children home that day. You Obama people still have your heads and hearts in the sand. Must be chocking on your own koolaid. This is not only about staying in and doing good in school. It is about Obama. If the School District had been concerned about student attendance and losing funding, they would not have permitted the live video. They have no room to cry WeeWee, like Obama says. This is why there are more Conservatives in our Country than you liberals. Most Americans are waking up to the Truth. We'll pray for the rest of you! Don't bother to rudely or nastily reply. I do not want to hear you cry Wee, Wee. I won't be answering back.
Posted by Anonymous, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 4, 2009 at 6:14 pm
Judi, you could almost replace "George W." with "Obama" for most of those "points" you make - particularly for #8. Where were those WMDs? You'd have to add a point about making sure to hire daddy's powerful friends to help move your agenda.
dublinmike, the neo-cons cannot get over the fact that a BLACK man won the presidency! If Bush were giving this address they'd be fine with it. It's okay for White Men to address their children.
I hated Bush, but honestly I would have NEVER objected to him giving a speech to encourage kids to stay in school. I think it's fine for our children to hear from THEIR president - whether I personally like that president or not.
It tells about the speech and then directs you to lessons for both elementary and secondary students. The lessons are from the Department of Education. In addition, the entire text of the speech will be available 24 hours in advance for preview.
Other presidents have addressed school children, including our previous President who did it about five times.
This is what gets press? The President of the United States would like to encourage students to be responsible and work hard in school.
I also was not a George W. Bush supporter and initially I was not an Obama supporter. I respect the office of the President and when I have concerns or disagree with a position, I will do so passionately and often but I will respect the Constitution and the office. I have a variety of recources including frequent elections.
When there is nothing else, desperate people resort to name calling and lies. I was curious about the news reports so I looked it up. I can't believe a reputable news source would even print this stuff. Don't reporters have to check their sources??????
Posted by Concerned American, a resident of the Highland Oaks neighborhood, on Sep 4, 2009 at 7:11 pm
I agree that the shock of having an African-American President has unhinged some folks. That's the only way you can explain the outrageous statements being passed off as truth by some people. It illustrates the corrosive effect of hatred on those who hate - all sense of common decency is lost.
Posted by paul, a resident of the Amberwood/Wood Meadows neighborhood, on Sep 4, 2009 at 7:19 pm
Concerned American...you couldn't be further from the truth.
It is all about ideology (of the most radical left) and NOTHING about race. I am a caucasian and would have been more than eager to vote for a minority if I felt his/her ideology was consistent with what I believe would be in the best interest of America.
Speaking of race, it seems to me that it is the LEFT who is the most racial, the most intolerant, the most violent, the most uncivil. There is no comparison.
Posted by ME, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 4, 2009 at 7:31 pm
You’re right, it is about ideology. The ideology of fear. The president is not a radial leftist. His views on education alone are not endorsed by the left. He wants more charter schools and wants teacher pay and performance to be based on test score. These seem to be right of center. Fear has not enable you and others to see the truth. The President wants to address student about setting goals and achieving those goals. Respect the office.
Posted by No Problem, a resident of the Pheasant Ridge neighborhood, on Sep 4, 2009 at 8:31 pm
I didn't vote for Obama nor am I a supporter of his polices; but I don't see the big deal with any President of the United States sending a back to school message to my 12 year old at PMS.I don't think a short speech regarding education by Obama is going to send my son home a little socialist on Tuesday evening.
Posted by Alee, a resident of the Highland Oaks neighborhood, on Sep 4, 2009 at 8:54 pm
I really feel that people who attach race to this are making a racist comment themselves. So sad. I could care less what color or sexual orientation Barry is. Geez.
It's not about the boring speech!!! It's about the fact that the administration is creating a lesson plan of what they want the kids to take away from it, rather than letting them draw their own conclusions. These same tactics have been used in Iraq, Cuba, and N. Korea. Give your snoozefest speech Mr. O, but don't tell kids what to think after they hear it.
Posted by Jean, a resident of the Birdland neighborhood, on Sep 4, 2009 at 9:06 pm
Dear No Problem:
I am amazed at how presumably educated people can be fooled by Obama. Your premise is wrong. Obama does not care one iota about the quality of our kids' education. If he did care, he would not be such a supporter of the NEA, which is a main reason for the decline in quality of American public schools. Equally important, he would not have yanked all those black kids from their quality charter school in D.C. to make them return to their miserable and dangerous innercity public school. It was only because of public outrage that he rescinded his decision.
The main reason he is addressing public school kids is that their minds are more malleable, they are a captive audience, and that he wants to reinforce that they (or their minds) are more the property of the Federal Govt than they are the property of their parents.
Government schools having more 'parental rights' than biological parents is one of the principle design factors of government schools which Horace Mann...father of public schools in America...insisted upon since it was modeled after the German government schools in the early 1930's.
While Obama may have changed his agenda for his speech on Sept. 8, any reference to platitudes of education will be secondary to his intended message of being subservient to him, his programs, and being a good loyal member of the social democrat party.
Posted by GOOD GOD!!, a resident of the Apperson Ridge neighborhood, on Sep 4, 2009 at 11:22 pm
He is the President of the United States. No matter what his party, respect the office. Don't make it political. It is not. Those of you who are full of hate...STOP. I am a Republican and disgusted by the lack of respect for the President, no matter who it is. STOP your divisiveness, it does us no good.
Posted by PToWN94566, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 12:16 am PToWN94566 is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com
I don't see any problem in letting all school children of the U.S. watch this address. People are making false claims and don't know one thing about this speech. It clearly says on the U.S. Dept of Education that the speech will be available to view on Monday. Also, if people take time to actually go to the website and read, they would know that "During this special address, the president will speak directly to the nation's children and youth about persisting and succeeding in school. The president will challenge students to work hard, set educational goals, and take responsibility for their learning." We all need to stop being so narcissistic, thinking that he's going to be speaking 'against' your party or that this is a policy speech- it's not. Let students' learn something without having to make such a huge fuss over it.
Posted by www.obamaportrait.net, a member of the Fairlands Elementary School community, on Sep 5, 2009 at 12:20 am
That's not enough. I suggest placing the portrait of Mr. President Obama in every classroom, to remind our children about the imporance of education in our life. As comrade Lenin said, "Learn, learn and learn again!".
Posted by No Problem, a resident of the Pheasant Ridge neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 7:22 am
Jean...(Portion removed) Would you feel the same way about Bush or McCain...or even Clinton taking to your kids about education. My kids don't even know who the NEA is, and I really don't think you are all that concerend about black kids in A DC charter school, sorry that dog won't hunt . Again, I am not an Obama supporter, but this just doesn't seem like the hill to die on in a fight with him to me. Unfortunatley, while I don't want to admit it, there does seem to be a racist content to these postings. Perhaps its just that the many posters don't want..a "Black" president doing a back to school address. Pretty sad state of times if that ie really the case here.
Posted by Lisa, a resident of the Foothill Knolls neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 7:22 am
As a parent in this community, and a teacher as well, I'm proud that our school district has supported showing the speech. It's pretty simple; the President of the United States is taking the time to talk directly to our youth about personal responsiblity. What am I missing here? I was embarrassed to see the 11:00 news last night featuring a Pleasanton soccer mom bashing the President's speech. She said something about 'more important issues that need to be addressed.' Hello......isn't education one of the most important keys to financial and personal success? It just shows how ignorant some of our fellow P-town neighbors can be. I was quick to point out to my 14 year old what a lack of education can do....
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger, a resident of the Vintage Hills Elementary School neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 8:01 am
I believe all that is necessary is for the principals/teachers to be allowed to make the decision of whether to watch AND for parents have input to the principal and teachers as to whether they want their child to participate. It wouldn't be that difficult to accommodate teachers and children who do and do not want to participate at each school. As an FYI, there was no direct information from Arne Duncan or Jack O'Connell or the county office of ed until Friday. Poor planning for rolling this out.
My question is why the president isn't making this address at some time after school when parents are the sole decision makers about having their children watch?
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger, a resident of the Vintage Hills Elementary School neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 10:08 am
Stay Cool, Yes, if the teachers have flexibility and can organize the time for participants and nonparticipants, no one has to lose instruction time or a school day. Not sure how they'll pull that off on a three day weekend--but they may have already discussed it.
Posted by Anonymous, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 1:27 pm
So, NObama, you saw the speech already, even though I thought it wasn't to be posted until Monday? You are going to look like an idiot when all that speech does is talk about responsibility, goals, education. I'm going to bet you know squat about Marxism, Communism, etc. You are likely just regurgitating what you heard on Rush.
Posted by FYI, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Anonymous: Rush was gone all week. You are "regurgitating" the only rebuttal you know ...so.....who looks like the "idiot" so then I conclude: "I'm going to bet you know squat about Marxism, Communism, etc"
Posted by Against Propaganda to Captive Students, a resident of the Country Fair neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 3:59 pm
The nation's students are a captive audience while at school. Obama has the ability to mesmerize many people into believing anything he says, and they will not check it or challenge it. Obama's planned speeches are highly orchestrated propaganda for his far left views. No president has ever before tried to propagandize the nation's entire student population when they are captive in school. There is no realistic "opt out" options for students and parents who don't want to be subjected to the propaganda. Obama should pick a time outside of school hours to have a TV broadcast that students and parents can either watch together or choose not to watch. Or let the parents view the speech first in a pre-recorded form, and then we can decide whether it is suitable.
Posted by Sally, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Are you telling us that the Right would have no problem with the President addressing the nation on TV about education? (Portion removed because it was disrespectful to other posters and didn't further the coversation.)Glenn Beck would go nuts. O'rielly would have to be talking down from the cross.
Kathleen Ruegsegger is trying to solve a "non-problem". By doing so you give credibility to this tantrum. If you're freaked out abut the President talking to your children about education then I'm sure you're going to have a cow when your child's teach begins their unit on evolution.
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger, a resident of the Vintage Hills Elementary School neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 5:44 pm
I didn't start this board, Sally. I offered a way to avoid all the BS posted here--sent the suggestion to Arne Duncan and the President too. BTW, I said let the teachers/principals/parents decide. It turns out that is what the district is doing according to an email from Myla Grasso. I'm perfectly fine with that.
I'm not in favor of a political bias at any level of education, from either end of the political spectrum. I don't like extremes from either side or in most anything, really. There are so many possible approaches to life, politics, religion, business. Why is it we try to narrow it down to a particular shape fitting into a particular hole? I personally have a set of beliefs that won't fit any of those perfect little shapes.
I consider myself an American; turns out that's not one of the cookie cutter parties available to us. I vote where a candidate most aptly fits my views. Sometimes that's a Democrat, then it's a Republican, and on other occasions, some other party. I respect everyone's right to choose to vote or not vote (although I think that is an error) where they please. I enjoy that right; I respect that right; I will defend it for everyone.
I don't think the president is anything but human, bound to make the same errors any of us make, but under a very bright light. I don't expect President Obama to be more than human, any more so than those who served as president before him. Some were more successful than others, but it's a bit early to write history about this one--he's barely rearranged the furniture.
Posted by ..mindless drone, a resident of the Downtown neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 6:20 pm
As a proud member of the right.. I would have no problem with the President.. any President.. addressing the nation. That was the point of my post! I said that!
My problem is with this President addressing a captive audience; school children. That's the problem. That's what's wrong.
If, as is widely speculated, the message is "Study, stay in school, better yourselves".. how does the President of the United States declare himself to be the best messenger for this message. Don't we have school counselors, teachers, and parents better qualified to convey this message??
Besides.. I'll bet any one of 'them' would be happy to show their birth certificate, school records, source of income, and tell us who paid for their education.
Posted by FYI, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 6:44 pm
Anonymous says: "Yes! I do think Obama can inspire children, regardless of what he has done with his own academic performance. I doubt kids will be obsessing about that the way the Right does."
Children are normally required by their parents to be open and transparent about their grades at school. I think this goes for all kids, regardless if the parent is left or right. Barack Obama has sealed off his transcripts from the people (along with a whole lot of "other" stuff. Shades of "audacity" perhaps??
Here is a non-right/left solution:
Let's not have anyone give the speech. Instead just put the camera's on the Tele-prompter and start the speech scrolling. That way all school-kids from grades K through 12 will have an opportunity to practice their reading skills, and will actually get to personally experience what it's like to be President of the United States. Plus it's great practice for Karaoke!
Posted by Stacey, a resident of the Amberwood/Wood Meadows neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 6:52 pm Stacey is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com
Unclehomerr wrote: "how does the President of the United States declare himself to be the best messenger for this message. Don't we have school counselors, teachers, and parents better qualified to convey this message??"
I think someone here earlier answered that question quite well. The basic gist of their post was that kids are sick of hearing that message from parents and teachers and others with whom they interact on a regular basis. When the message comes from the POTUS, it carries a lot of weight, which is somewhat why some folks are up in arms about this. When a message comes from a respected authority figure kids will pay attention. That's why people are concerned about what that message is.
Posted by Stacey, a resident of the Amberwood/Wood Meadows neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 6:56 pm Stacey is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com
fyi asked: "is it possible for president to inspire school children about education when he continues to hide the record of his academic performance"
When a kid who grows up without their dad and doesn't grow up entirely with their mom either works through those problems and doesn't let them stand in the way of his own personal success is able to achieve the office of POTUS, I'd say the record speaks for itself.
Posted by IMHO, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 7:43 pm
If you are going to "inspire" anyone on education and market it like you really care about our children then the non-partisan way to asses this would be to look at his record to date on education.
In Chicago last yr thousands of parents held their children out of school in protest because of the school conditions and the substandard education their children were getting. This same president is against school choice. Look at the conditions of the schools in Chicago and Washington D.C., Obama's home turf, they sound like a disgrace.
Good point FYI: Try to find Obama's grades from Columbia or Harvard. All we hear is how smart he is. If its true,(and it very well may be) show me his grades. But they can't because they are not published anywhere. I went online and found the grades for Al Gore, George Bush and John Kerry in five minutes. Nowhere could I find anything on this president. It seems like he was the invisible man in college. No one seems to remember him, even people who took the same courses as he did.
I also read that he is going to appear again at night in a back-to-school special with Kelly Clarkson and LeBron James. Why does he need to be on twice in the same day?
Sadly to say,his speech is all about face time, its all about the camera, its all about Obama. It has nothing to do with our children and even less about inspiring.
Posted by anonymous, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 7:44 pm
In this country you can question and be skeptical. Nothing you have said or has been printed indicates there was any wrong doing. But you don't have to believe and, unlike other places, you will actually get to vote in a relatively short amount of time. Since we all did vote, he is our President and the office deserves the benefit of the doubt. We certainly afforded to a president who was not duly elected. (Do you know how hard it is to get into Harvard? Or wait, maybe it is your family or who you know. . . or maybe that is just Yale.)
Posted by Not Stacey, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 8:18 pm
Stacey, just trying to understand your logic. It looks like you think that in this case the direct message from the Government to kids will work better than parents message to them; if so, do you think this is a rule or an exception?
Posted by FYI, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 8:29 pm
Anonymous asks me: "Do you know how hard it is to get into Harvard?"
Very interesting question,. And I might and I might add a good observation, Anonyomus.
I would assume very hard but since there are NO RECORDS, it invites the question of how he even got in or for that matter paid for it? Not saying this is so but many believe he received aid by registering as a foreign student?? Without any RECORD , hard to say either way.
Isn't it strange that no professors or teachers at any level have ever come forward to praise the in-class accomplishments of this intellectual giant, especially since "it is so hard" to get into Harvard. I mean, was he wearing a disguise or using an assumed name during his academic career? Or, was he just so unimpressive and non-descriptive that he escaped serious attention.
In response to your: " Or wait, maybe it is your family or who you know. . . or maybe that is just Yale" comment.......Let me remind you again, this thread is NOT about Bush. But if in fact Bush did get into Yale via his family connections, at least there is some evidence to support that possibility and perhaps add valadity to your assumption.
With Obama, it is so painfully obvious he is hiding something. Why the hidden paper trail? No Client list, Illinois Senate records. Transcripts, passports, complete medical records, papers, scores, adoption papers, admission papers.......
Posted by Stacey, a resident of the Amberwood/Wood Meadows neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 9:02 pm Stacey is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com
My logic? I was paraphrasing someone else's post. Even if it were my own thoughts on the subject, it seems to me that you are merely trying to put words into another's mouth. What isn't clear about the logic of having children hear the same message that parents and teachers repeat (hopefully) daily from another source and why does it become a conversation about who is better? The answer is actually all of the above.
Posted by Anonymous, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 9:07 pm
The President of the U.S. presides over The Department of Education, and so is essentially the ultimate "boss" over public education. I think he has a right to address public school children! A multitude of other presidents have addressed children, as was their right too (whether I liked them or not). The speech will be available for you to review, unlike the content of what teachers and other support staff say to your children on a daily basis. At least this content will be heavily monitored. I can't believe some of the things I hear that teachers have said! You want to have control over everything in your child's life, but guess what - it's an illusion. You have no control. Talk to your children; teach them to think analytically, so that they will be able to make sound judgments without you around.
Posted by Anonymous, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 9:16 pm
I agree that it's a great idea for kids to hear such a message from someone other than parents and teachers. As someone on another thread pointed out - this speech isn't only being televised in Pleasanton, where the majority of the population is white, relatively wealthy and educated. Many of you don't see the possible positive impact of his speech, especially on minority children, because you are not a minority or living in poverty. Not all parents talk to their kids about achieving, setting goals, staying in school, etc.! We are very sheltered here in P-Town!
Posted by Timechanged, a resident of the Stoneridge neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 9:57 pm
Time has changed and the demographics of Pleasanton has changed. Those bunch of people who filled with hatred is not the majority of Pleasanton anymore! Pleasanton and trivalley has already elected Democat congressman and Obama as the President of the United States!
Sorry to those people who could not accept the reality - Pleasanton is the no longer the hatred town you used to anymore.
Posted by Well..., a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 10:37 pm
the next direct address of Mr. President should be to the married people, about their family duties (strong families are important to the nation). What isn't clear about the logic of having married men and women hear the same message that their spouses repeat (hopefully) daily - from another source and why does it become a conversation about who is better? The answer is actually all of the above.
Posted by Alee, a resident of the Highland Oaks neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 10:38 pm
I can't believe the reactions of people just from others questioning authority. Shouldn't everybody question our politicians' motives? Some of you act like we should just sit there and listen to whatever. This has been the attitude in many dictatorships too. So far, I haven't heard any info that will cause me to keep my kids home that day. BUT I will be keeping my eyes and ears open and listening to the speech myself. Should I be called an intolerant right wing racist for this? NO!! I would be willing to bet that the Obama-lovers will have no conversation with their children regarding this. However, I will be very interested to know what they take away from it. EVERYONE should question authority without ridicule.
Posted by Stacey, a resident of the Amberwood/Wood Meadows neighborhood, on Sep 5, 2009 at 11:14 pm Stacey is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com
I like how you took school children as a group and made them into a poor analogy to married people as a group, as if adults have the same level of mental, social, and psychological development as children. It doesn't really strengthen your argument and I don't think you're trying to suggest that children should not be encouraged to stay in school. (Pssst, do you really tell your spouse daily about how important your relationship is to the nation?!)
Posted by Former Pleasanton Resident, a resident of another community, on Sep 6, 2009 at 1:54 pm
Personally, if my children were still of school age, I would be very disappointed with a teacher who did not allow them to hear the President's address... not to mention an administrator or district. We taught our children to have respect for the office and responsibilities that accompany that position. I'm really not sure what others are teaching their children, but from what I have read, there is reason to be concerned.
Posted by Anonymous, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 6, 2009 at 2:38 pm
Thank you for the link! I don't care if the President is Republican, Democrat or other...he/she, as leader of our country, has the right to address public school children! I see no cause for concern, unless the speech is inappropriate for children (e.g. frightening, political). And I don't get the fury regarding the lesson plans (also mentioned in the video comments). I reviewed them and they seem very open ended and appropriate to me. It's not like the children are instructed to rant, "I love Obama". They are asked to analyze, recall, and relate content to themselves - the *usual* goals.
Posted by Fact Checker, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 6, 2009 at 5:16 pm
Academics and financial records at any college are private. Just try and get the grades of your adult children through the University if you doubt what I say. The same to be said for the records and financial information of students in K-12 education. So if you know someone's information it is because they have released it. Even if they did release it what would you know at that point. We know other presidents were not stellar students, (and I am not just talking about Bush), and it didn't deter people from voting for them. I am not suggesting Obama was less than a stellar student. I just don't know.
If you are suggesting that it is because Obama might have been an international student I find that unbelievable. His mother was an American so he would not ever had status as an international student under any circumstances. Do you know how hard it is to keep a secret? People think that the conspiracy is so large that the State of Hawaii, Schools in Hawaii, University of Chicago, Harvard University and all the people in between would keep this quiet because???? They knew he would seek the presidency at birth so they conspired to change his birth certificate??? Should I mention that while Hawaii has two senators who are Democrats, their state government tends to be more conservative.
McCain actually was born outside the United States in Panama. True, his father was on active duty but he was born off the base. How do we reconcile this with the literal words of the Constitution? The way we reconciled this issue was by having Congress pass a resolution.
The best commentary might be the editorial in the paper yesterday. Two caracatures: One of Obama addressing school children on the importance of responsibility and working hard in school and the second one of GW Bush reading "My Pet Goat" to children in an elementary classroom, which he was doing when the twin towers came down.
Don't we have bigger issues? Can we find some way to be citizens without doing it on the backs of people that don't think the same way?
Sometimes my candidate wins and sometimes he or she looses. But this is my country and when I don't agree I work to replace the person. I don't do it by spreading untrue information or just making stuff up to try and discredit someone. I think civic virtue and integrity mean something and I would encourage anyone who has the chance to listen to our president, whether I agree with him (or Her) or not. It's a teaching/learning moment.
Posted by Unemployed, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 6, 2009 at 5:21 pm
we do have bigger issues and that is the point. he is not working on any of the major issues just his social agenda items like his healthcare initiative and his speech to the kids. How about the economy, mortgage crisis, unemployment, war in afghanistan, war in iraq, nuclear weapons in iran and north korea, swine flu etc. he is not a leader but nothing more than a campaigner and as one who voted for him i am done with him and will never vote democrat again in my life.
Posted by fact checker, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 6, 2009 at 6:17 pm
I think health care is a bigger issue. He has worked on the economy, the mortgage crisis and unemployment. It took longer than 8 months to create the problem and it will take more than 8 months to fix it. Besides he is not the only one culpable. Congress is in this mix too.
The war issue is something I hoped would have a quicker resolution but to say he is only a campaigner and therefore would never vote democrat again lacks critical thinking. Do you think McCain would have magically solved all these problems? I am not making up my mind who to vote for until I see the choices and give this some time to work. Meanwhile, I spend some of my time paying attention to Congress and letting my congressperson know what I think is important.
Posted by Jeff, a resident of the Amberwood/Wood Meadows neighborhood, on Sep 6, 2009 at 6:58 pm
Unemployed--you are wise in not voting again for a democrat and don't let anonymous above influence you. Dems are against free market capitalism and are for growing goby at any expense. Their insatiable govt growth is unsustainable.
Hey Anonymous, you said Obama has "worked on" the economy. Wow! He sure has...but his efforts are to deliberately destroy it! It is no mystery how to improve an economy if one had that as a goal. Reagan turned around a much worse economy by reducing marginal tax rates which resulted in revenue gains for the Fed govt and it stimulated job growth exponentially. Reagan's efforts produced over 20 million new jobs because in large part he created an entrepreneurial environment where you could reap the benefits of your productive labor.
It is not rocket science, especially since there are historical benchmarks to learn from. However Obama is doing the exact opposite of what has been proven to work. I submit to you he is destroying our economy deliberately. There is not one shred of evidence otherwise.
Unless he and his fellow social democrats are not stopped, their damage may be irreparable.
Posted by anonymous, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 6, 2009 at 7:27 pm
Thanks for the correction!
Gee I wish we were talking facts and not emotion. We are still trying to recover from Reagan's trickle down economic philosophy and deregulation certainly has been a disappointment. There is a huge disparity between the rich and the poor. I am sure there is some way to blame that on democrats. The fact is, we all need to work together and find a way to figure out how to talk to one another. You think this is socialism? Gee, I only can hope that this generation spends more time learning history than operating on emotion.
Ah, back to the thread.
Do we want the President of the United States making a public statement that education is important, that students should work hard in school and that students should accept personal responsibility for their actions?
I do! Any president can make that statement and I would be thrilled because a democracy depends an an educated populous.
Posted by unemployed, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 6, 2009 at 7:58 pm
I want him to work on fixing the economy and not wrecking it. He is failing miserably in everything except increasing our debt. If he is such an expert on public education how come with no money he went to private high school, private colleges, occidental, columbia, harvard and his daughters go to private school. anybody wonder how his wives salary went from 75K per year to 400K per year as a public relations representative as soon as he was elected to state office?..............I think he is a crook
Posted by paul, a resident of the Amador Estates neighborhood, on Sep 7, 2009 at 7:25 am
Dear Stay Cool,
My first reaction to your question was to dismiss it, because anyone who is asking such a question simply must not be paying attention to waht Obama has done thus far to hurt America economically and defensively, or what he is planning to do.
However, in a short two minutes, I decided to list just a FEW items and I am sure there are more. In addition, rather than spoon-feed you, I've provided a link to very good empirical research so that you can learn for yourself.
Posted by paul, a resident of the Amador Estates neighborhood, on Sep 7, 2009 at 7:43 am
PS...Let me emphasize one item to add to the above list.
- The fact that Obama has REFUSED to adopt Reagan's tax cut program should tell you all you need to know, especially in a down economy. Reagan inherited a MUCH WORSE economy from Carter. What did Reagan do to bring back our economy? He cut the marginal tax rate which resulted in over 20 million new jobs and brought back our economy in a robust manner.
In case you hadn't noticed, Obama is doing the opposite of Reagan. It should make you very nervous of what Obama has in store for us. He is deliberately destroying us with
- piling on our debt,
- increasing our taxes,
- increasing the growth of govt.,
- making us more dependent on govt,
- reducing individual incentive to produce more and to grow more jobs
Posted by Riley, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 7, 2009 at 10:24 am
Lets take a look at Paul's list.
#1 - Stimulus package - Wasn't designed for an immediate fix. The package is designed to upgrade long term infrastructure projects that will help the US be competitive in the future. We could build bridges to nowhere like in Alaska but projects like upgrading an antiquated electrical grid will benefit many generations.
#2 – National Health Care – Many ideas have been bandied around but nothing has passed. Again, long term, I think the goal is to reduce (yes reduce) costs by having a competitive and preventive system of health care. There is no doubt that an aging American demographic will increase costs for our country. The challenge is to redesign the system to make it better and more efficient (less expense). By doing nothing, costs will increase.
#3 – Cap and Trade. – Here we go again, industry crying about what they cannot do. Seats belts and airbags were supposed to end the car industry. This turned out to be not true.
Cap and trade is the most efficient way for industry to self regulate. Companies can buy and trade credits. There is an incentive to emit less but for companies who cannot, they can go to an exchange to buy credits. We have a large capital project at work that we can likely justify because of cap and trade. Our company becomes more efficient and the project expense could be justified by the revenue from selling our credits. I don’t buy that it will cause job losses. This is always the fear tactic. By being more efficient with upgraded machinery, I would argue the US will be more competitive and long term, cap and trade can create jobs.
#4 –Bush tax cuts - No evidence that the Bush tax cuts created jobs. It did increase the deficit. In no time in history have we engaged in a war (Iraq) while cutting taxes until the Bush tax cuts. During the Bush years, real wages fell and the ephemeral growth we had was fueled by the speculative housing bubble.
#5 – Minimum and max wages. No evidence on the minimum wage job losses that you cite. The max wages were targeted to specific companies that took Federal money to stay afloat. No one is suggesting that there be a general maximum wage. (It did come up during some G20 meeting in the past few days but I don’t know what that has to do with Obama.)
#6 – TARP was signed by Bush before Obama was president. Regarding the auto industry, this is a tough call. I agree that companies that have been so mismanaged and slow to change their product mix to meet consumer demands should fail. However, if GM fails, some of their suppliers likely fail. Without a robust supplier mix, other car companies that are making cars people do want to buy (like Toyota) may choose to continue to pull production from the US. GM failing could have created a domino effect that would resonate outside of GM. It did not happen so one can only speculate.
#7 – Exponential growth in public sector - No evidence and you need to check your facts.
The rest of your list consists of half truths or policy grievances you have. Policy grievances are great to debate but the half truths are pretty silly. Examples:
“Support to totalitarian regimes like Venezuela, Cuba and others...” Give me a break, how are we supporting Venezuela? I imaging you copied this off some list but the authors of the list are very specific about naming Venezuela and Cuba (to give that visceral effect) but then say “and others.” Who are the others? Why aren’t they named?
“Funds terrorist group Hamas” I assume you are referring to a memo that was signed for assistance of refugees in Gaza? I thought this has been discredited a few months ago but I guess it helps make your list longer. Obama did indeed sign a memorandum allocating $20.3 million from the Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund for refugees and conflict victims in Gaza. To say he funding Hamas is deceptive and misleading.
Posted by Janna, a resident of Dublin, on Sep 7, 2009 at 11:01 am
Riley, excellent post!
Don't you love how they forget it took Bush 8 years to bring our country to its knees. We're not even a year in and Obama is supposedly destroying the country single-handed. They have Bush-nesia and rely on propaganda and hyperbole to try to make their pathetic points. The problem is there are so many out there desperate to believe it all because it reinforces their ideology that it spreads like a disease.
Kind of reminds me how they claim Bush kept us safe since 9/11. Apparently no matter that 9/11, the largest terrorist attack on US soil, happened during his term. Bush-nesia.
Posted by Paul, a resident of the Amador Estates neighborhood, on Sep 7, 2009 at 3:11 pm
Dear Riley and Janna,
There is a big difference in declaring there is "no evidence" vs being either too lazy to do the research yourself or not understanding the research. Evidence of my above info is clearly documented and available. But my guess is that you are not interested in facts that would refute your longheld liberal beliefs. In the unlikely event that you are curious, however, you could start searching on www.heritage.org.
I'll not hold my breath that you'll change you beliefs. It took me a few years after college to switch from my liberal ideals.
Posted by Stay Cool, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 7, 2009 at 5:38 pm
Paul, the Heritage Foundation exists to promote a consevative agenda, and can't be used for unbiased research.
I think Riley spent a fair amount of time responding to your list - I definitely wouldn't say s/he is lazy! When you're making claims or accusations, the onus is on you to provide the evidence. Riley presented evidence or examples for most of his/her posts. Frankly, your argument looks pretty weak in comparison.
I would add that closing Gitmo does not compromise national security - the prisoners need to be taken somewhere, accused, and tried - not left to languish - and worse- without due process. We're a better country than that. The same goes for the situation with the CIA - those kinds of practices can't be endorsed by the greatest country in the free world, and addressing that doesn't undermine our security, either.
If you de decide to respond, please take a moment to realize it is a debate and not a reflection on anyone's moral character if the disagree with you.