10 September 2010

Preisdent's Annual Back to School Address

Seem that this year B.O. is delivering his BB (big brother) speech to the school kiddies , and I say "Kudos Mr. President!"  It is clear from the debate off of the Dagger's article that we have the most divisive president ever.  Forget Bush, he was for pansies!  Even though he drug us into two wars (one legitimate and one not so much) and spurned some really messed up legislation upon us (Patriot act), for the most part he was just the same as Clinton.  High spending, high borrowing, moderately high taxes, government handouts, contracts for "friends," really just another politician.

Did Bush have his cool-aid drinkers?  Absolutely!  However, he also had a lot of detractors on the conservative side that disliked his social agenda and big government intrusions.  As one can see from the debate, there is a very stark contrast between those who oppose big government and those who are the counter-revolutionaries that support big government.  Even the act of a benign back to school address is now so politically charged that educators feel the need to throw their clout around and show their true liberal colors. 

I get that some messages need to be drilled into certain children in an effort to mold them into productive members of society.  Others are lost causes and will never be reached.  Additionally, I realize that our nation has often looked up to men of great stature for guidance on tough subjects.  Please keep in mind the messenger should never over shadow the message, and that's what we are after here; the message.  We want every school child to work hard, stay in school and learn as much as possible every single day.  A politician who uses a questionably captive audience does not achieve the same response that structural reinforcement from educators and administrators, or more importantly parents and mentors, do on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis. 

By President Obama delivering this message, parents are absolved from their responsibility for being engaged in the development of their children.  Reliance upon the state for morality and values, even those which are admirable traits associated with the civil society, perpetuates a breakdown of the traditional societal structure that promotes freedom and liberty.  Denigrating the family nucleolus is a not only a key to the success of the statist, but the direct implosion that causes family members to be pitted against one another is a powerful tool for agenda advancement.  If we allow our politicians to infiltrate the halls of education (which has been done for the last 50 years through the use of their proxy educators), we have the exact pitting of children against parents that Orwell illustrates so successfully in 1984. 

The detractors are already say, "But isn't this a bit drastic."  Of course it is, but is it real?  With the division we see amongst community members in the linked article, is it really hard to imagine this ulterior motive to be so accurate?  Kudos to the president for wanting to trumpet that kind of work hard message (if that is all that it is), but it really is unwarranted in the tradition and history of the USA’s liberty minded people.  Like most government interventions, the civil society does not need it's governmental Big Brother to deliver morality and civil society messages to us on a daily, weekly, or even annual basis.  The civil society, when left alone is quite good at taking care of itself.  We in the country class have done and will continue to do a good job of taking care of the problems (or un-problems) that are present in life. 

In short, does it really matter if President Obama makes a speech to school kiddies as they return to their classrooms and course work?  Probably not, but in this case Mercury completely overwhelms his dispatch by his mere presence, and that is what we should be focusing on; the message. 

No comments:

Post a Comment