You don't have to read too many of these statements to know who are the closet racists,all the nitpicking and all the snide little remarks written here today and everyday,easily identify and give you away!
And yes the same was true about Bush, however most everything he said was unintelligible,easily disapproved or just a outright lie!

Glenn Beck is on 640AM, WGST in Atlanta at the same time slot as Neal Boortz. You pushed the limit this time, bashing your own listeners. What an idiot! I'll be listening to Glenn from now on!

Why does Mattel give Barbie a Mastercard? Brand loyalty

Why do advertisers put billboards in video games? Brand Loyalty (Obama did this too)

Why does the President want to speak to a few million Pre-K thru 6th grade school children? Brand Loyalty

The children do not have the foggiest idea about politics for the most part. They, like someone already said, don't know how they can help Obama aside from doing their homework. What it does is put Obama in thier little brain housing groups, so when they do get old enough in the next 4-12 years they will remember Obama and hopefully align with the Democratic Party. Not saying that they will but just planting that little "ACORN" in their heads hoping it will grow into a mightly oak of support for their party. Once again rooting to power not short term support for Obama, but lifelong support for a f**cking political party.

Elitist? You're one to talk. You come on here and put yourself on this soapbox, preaching to the choir. Disappointingly, you squander your efforts trying to bash one party when both are equally guilty of destroying our nation, just in different ways. This mentality/strategy is what perpetuates the two party system which is failing us, and that is what I have a problem with. You constantly use ‘we’ this and ‘we’ that… Are you a member of some kind of club which you speak on behalf of? I speak for myself and provide my own opinions, independent of a need to feel like I have a whole committee standing behind me. Referring to yourself as a plurality doesn’t augment the merit in your arguments, though if it makes you feel better, I’m not one to say you should stop.

Speaking to your age-bashing reference - I was born in 1980. I remember the kiddy newspaper (Weekly Reader) running articles on both Bush and Dukakis, even polling kids on who they'd vote for. This all under the glorious Reagan years... wacky politicians were trying to get to kids indoctrinated even then. The Gulf war happened when I was 11. I watched Clinton’s inaugurations, both of them, on televisions in my classrooms. I don’t have a problem including children in the politics of the present, otherwise they would be ignorant of their living history when they’re older, and this would further our youth’s ignorance of politics, which is why we have who we have in the Oval Office today. I was attempting to put myself in the mindset of a child watching a President speak, based on my recollection of what early childhood was like. It's called empathy, give it a shot, it helps you formulate better arguments instead of spewing talking points.

I'm 29 years old. That is old/experienced enough to run for Senate in 2010, according to our wise founding fathers. If you've got a problem with people my age or younger, maybe you should stand in front of our military and tell them how inexperience and unintelligent they are, simply because they largely haven’t reached whatever age you may be (assuming you’re older than mid-20’s). Years don’t necessarily equate to wisdom, otherwise we’d have seen more than 51% of 60+ Seniors voting for McCain, right? They sure don’t vote Libertarian…. Care to bash them too?

You'd be surprised at how much we agree on, I just don't care for your caustic delivery. Hell, even your name evokes a mild allusion to violence. I'm willing to use my first name, disclose my age and residency in these forums… you get to hide in anonymity behind a cute little name. Maybe that is a sign of maturity …I think of it as dishonesty.

Glad I could stir you up.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/53712

"The Republicans need to tone down the rhetoric and figure out how to get the independents and moderates back to voting Conservative (the polls show they are). It does matter how you win."

You are confusing Republicans with Conservatives. You actually have it backwards. The conservatives, including many independents, are leading this movement and the GOP, as spineless and gutless as they are, have come along for the ride. This so called "rhetoric" and protesting is coming from the people. Seriously, can you name any Republicans in Congress that have really made an impression these last few months? They are being carried by the people and talk radio is doing the heavy lifting.

Look at the polls, as the Dem Party's ratings are sinking down like a limp di
There should be no compromise on CRAP. Compromising on CRAP is still CRAP. Stick with you beliefs. The problems always start when we begin to pander and compromise our beliefs. That is why the GOP has gone downhill. Take health care, what's the compromise, huh?? what could posibble be the bipartisan way? Half-socialism, half free market, is that bipartisan solution??

No compromise, no apologies. We are right, they are wrong. Stick with your ideals. That simple.

Daniel, yes he was in a room with a couple dozen schoolkids -- not on TV speaking to a few MILLION.

And where were YOUR precious leftist Democrats when President H.W. Bush made a similar televised address to schoolkids in 1991? They were screaming bloody murder! Calling it 'political indoctrination'. Shouting that the resources of the government shouldn't be USED for such a thing. They held CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS on the issue. Dragged Department of Education officials in front of their tribunal, and even threatened to cut funding for educational programs.

So don't lecture US about overreaction. The left went WAY overboard when H.W. Bush did the exact same thing -- and he didn't even require a 'lesson plan' afterwards.

Your attitude is what is wrong with the Conservative Party. Taking the all or nothing highway is going to guarantee that the next 50 years of politics are dominated by a Democrat agenda. The Republicans need to tone down the rhetoric and figure out how to get the independents and moderates back to voting Conservative (the polls show they are). It does matter how you win.

For the millionth time, WHo THE HELL CARES WHAT THE OTHER SIDE WILL CALL US?????????? Haven't you gotten through your thick heads yet that conservatives could take the shirts off their backs and give every single penny they have to the "lesssss fortunate" and the next day the libs will still demonize us. Quit worrying about what they will say. Look at the way they are demonizing us over Van Jones! We are the culprit,and not the commie, racist, truther lunatic!

The fact of the matter is that we finally got them on the defensive. Anything they try to do, you squash them. Yeah,, yeah, for you wussies out there, it's disrespectful and we shouldn't lower the bar to what they did over the last 8 years blah blah blah... Bottom line: it works. That's what the Dems did to Bush, and guess what, in November 2008, the Dems could have run a totem pole for president and they would have won because just the mere mention of Bush made people puke so much so that OBozo's whole campaign, other than Change and Hope, was chants of "we don't need 4 more years of Bush".

We need to use any and all tactics against them. Whatever works. Alinsky-style tactics. The end result is too important to be worried about style points.

Forrest, I am getting pretty tired of you lecturing us and your elitist "I am so smart because I see both sides of the issue" crap. Based on what you have written (8 years old during Bush Sr), I take it you are in your mid-20's. Spare me your worldly knowledge. Experience life a few more years in the real world, and then get back to us.

Overall, a general speech for staying in school and learning what you should. However, was this the agenda Obama wanted to cover? Did the Right-Wing crowd give their comments too early, allowing Obama and the writers to change the speech and make the non-Obama supporters look foolish? We will never know!!!!

I disagree Neal. We did not have the speech prior to the Teachers Union putting together the bogus reflection work. If it had been on the up & up no changes would have had to be made.

This furor allowed the speech writers to get out of the way of what was really their intention all along...and appear as though this administration was on the up & up.

You should be...The far right are acting like loons. Applaud the speech for what it was...a speech asking children to realize their potential. This is a very conservative ideal. If you look past your hatred for everything President Obama, you could see that this was harmless but with benefits. The conjecture regarding what may or may not have been written were it not for the Conservative uproar, should embarrass you as well. This type of sensless banter from Conservatives is why the far left will make many gains in the next election.

Boortz suffers from white guilt and that's why he sided with BO on this subject.

there are reports out there that he spoke directly to the kids BEFORE the televised portion. Does anyone doubt that????

In my opinion, the speech obama gave could have been different from the one that he originally planned to give.

Remember, after the uproar the planned follow up for the children was also changed and later I read, totally put aside.

So, imo, it doesn't mean those of us who were concerned are left looking foolish. It might just be his script was also changed.

Neal:
Even though Obama's speech was neutral and didn't set any agenda, the parents who opted not to let their kids watch and those who opposed the speech altogether took the proper action regardless of your opinion. No one really expected a commie recruitment speech, Obama pretty much said what was expected, but given his track record, better safe than sorry. There's one possible aspect that hasn't been mentioned and that is subliminal messages embedded in the tape delay. Who knows what was added between the lines for the young minds to absorb. It could be simple cartoons delivering a message about socialist healthcare.

what speech?

that's what i'm saying.

I think it's important to note:

Had Bush given this exact same speech those against it would have been all for it and those that think it's wonderful would have been up in arms about it.

It's much like how if Bush mentions 'God' or goes to church then he's a religious nut. If Obama does it the same folk ignore it.

It's one of the things that really gets me about politics:
Do you have core beliefs or a core team and "he's your guy!" (or not your guy as the case may be).

If you're solely following your team you're lacking in principles. They both (Dems and Reps) hose us over just in different ways. Not everything that Obama has said and done has been reprehensible and you're foolish to believe that McCain would have been that much different that Obama.

Government spending on crazy programs is a bad idea. When the Republicans were doing it I heard Democrats complain. Now that it's reversed the complaints are reversed. The 'it's a bad idea' really shouldn't change based on the political affiliation of whomever is your representative.

From what I heard of the speech, I didn't have any problems with it. The 'lesson plan' stuff seems like it's just a fall-back plan for those who were against the speech from the start.

While I can understand the apprehensiveness of folks to have their kids spoken to by someone who's not-their-guy I think it's better to let the person speak and then go over it with your kids asking them what was said, etc. It's just information, the person may be giving the wrong information but it's still just information (not saying Obama did - just to make the point).

For example, let's say some crazy Nazi came to the school and said, "Hate the jews." I could easily look at my kids and tell them, "well that's just stupid." If the same Nazi walks in and says, "You shouldn't kill people." Well, I really have no problem with that. You -shouldn't- kill people. Separate the message from the person and address the message.

Put it on a more personal basis: There are problem folks reading this (just based on stats) that have a spouse who is cheating on them or who, themselves, are cheating. So, if you're kid came to you later in life and asked, "I'm thinking about cheating on my spouse," wouldn't you want the message to always be, "Don't cheat on your spouse," regardless of whether it was the one who cheated or not? The message stays the same and true regardless of who delivers it.

Thank God that Obama gave a speech to those kids yesterday, because otherwise Christian parents would never get riled up over what their kids are being taught in public schools. Why pay attention to the secular fundamentalism, the lack of discipline, and the government dependence that your kids are being taught on days when the President ISN'T giving them a speech? Get a grip folks.

Obama sounded like Ronald Reagan with his personal responsibility theme. Too bad that his policies are 180 degrees from his rhetoric.

...The main reason the speech should not have been done is because government should not be involved in education; not complaining about that point makes you less of a libertarian...of course we know you are not truly libertarian in the first place.

This speech actually was pretty good. My daughter (9 yrs old) did not attend, because my wife and I already do a fine job of expaining the importance of an education. My issues with the whole "show" were simply this. What would the topic have been if people did not react with outrage? (My guess was about service and "giving back")And, if this was such a topic that President Obama felt so strongly about (working hard and taking responsibility) then why hasn't he been talking about it for the past TWO YEARS! If he values working hard and doing well because of it, why are his policies punishing those who do just that. So obvioiusly this was just a speech that does not conform with his real beliefs and was done purely for political reasons. That was why my daughter did not need to be subjected to it. Had she been in high school, she would have attended so that we could discuss it afterwards.

Good thing that harmless little worksheet was removed. It would been a bit too late to undo the damage (as nice as the water feels to all of us frogs about to be boiled in this pot) after the fact. Think about it. If you were to GET to have a conversation about what was being promised to Obama by your child and your son or daughter said (in defense of their commitment to Obama and his principles), it might proceed like this:

“What is your job?”

“I am a talk show host (or, enter your career here _______).”

“Oh. Is that more important and powerful than being the President of the United States, Daddy? Does that mean you are smarter than Barack Obama?"”

Good luck with that one, everyone. Including you, Mr. Boortz. The attempted division between parent and child is a serious issue. That's what parents and Americans need, right Obama? Son vs father, daughter vs mother and children vs neighbors. With everything else currently spiraling the drain in America, we need to have to assert our parental authority over our own children regarding their perception of an Icon and his underlying desire for power represented as love and kindness.

Nothing innocuous about it if it was an attempt to gain more useless idiot recruits for the fifth column.

Regardless, it was SQUASHED by grass roots. When damned if you do, damned if you don't the best decision is "do". I say good job.

It figures government teachers would need a lesson plan from the administration to tell them how to interpret the speech and guidelines on how to incorporate that speech into their daily lesson.

The teachers must be as brain dead as Boortz is today. Seeing that Boortz fails to understand the fact that Obama does nothing without promoting Obama and furthering his agenda.

Did we get rolled? Probably, but what was in the speech that was not given? You know the one that ended up in the shredder?

We opted out because it was a waste of time and frankly aimed at kids who are under achievers. Either way - in or out would have been just fine for fluff like this speech.

Newsflash, Neal. Most people don't parse this stuff like you do. Nobody cares. They just don't want politicians giving speeches directly to their kids. How hard is that to understand? Nobody got "embarrassed".

Mr. Boortz!

Why are you bashing us? People have a right to "freak" out on this POTUS and any other POTUS. WE need to keep this Administration in constant check; because, you know they are going to come back multi-fold on each issue. I turned you on for 5 minutes, and then cut off. It's 75% BS...

I just thought there was one subliminal part of the speech when he said I know its the governments responsibility to provide good teachers, materials etc. but its up to you do do the work. Its sending the message to these kids that if all they do is work hard then the government will provide everything they need. I just love how this guy cant have one speech without saying the word government.

who cares about his speech? is this the only thing that has got you fired up?

i guess it is. goodbye america. it was sure nice to know ya.

neal's got it right though. he believes that you aren't smart enough to argue about real world stuff. like how we have more mercenaries than regular troops, or how brazil is flexing it's muscles down south because its oil finds, or how the UN wants to have a world wide currency, and on and on and on....

hey, did you see what Family Guy had on last night....

Apparently, Obama cautioned kids about posting their antics on Facebook, etc. But note how he should have said "don't do these antics in the first place" rather than to just keep them off the Internet--what a loser he is.

P.S. It's good for people to post their antics on the Internet because it is of utmost appropriateness for others like employers to judge these people accordingly.

Great comments.

Bruce, you're right. Using Boortz logic, why are we all upset over the speech tonight, afterall, I am sure it will also be "innocuous", just like all his other "focus-grouped" speeches and soundbites. Does anyone actually think he will come out and say that he wants a single-payer system?? So, why is Boortz mad about what he will say on this?

Beacon,

He made fun of the "teabag" movement at first. As for being a great orator, OBozo is terrible. For 2 years now, I have been screaming inside everytime I hear someone say how good a speaker he is. I dubbed him the "Walking Hallmark Card". The man just speaks in the simplest cliches and platitudes. It's embarrassing. However, studies show, when it comes to public speaking, people are more captivated by cadence and tone vs. what the speaker actually says. Even that, his cadence is like nails on a chalkboard. He stresses the last word in the sentence. He reminds me of a better speaking Shaquille Oneal.

The US hasn't been attacked by radical Islamists since Obama took office, and using Neal Boortz logic that must prove that there's nothing at all wrong with the PrezBo. We conservatives just have our "panties in a wad" and should hand our kids over to him for their moral instruction because...well, the sky hasn't fallen yet.

Great commentary, Neal. Tomorrow you'll
tell us foolish conservatives that national health care isn't such a bad idea because Obama has not eviscerated the Second Amendment yet. We conservatives just need to chill. Right, Neal?

"working hard" ??????????????????
to stay on television?
improve my poll numbers?
waste more taxpayer money flitting about the globe?
appoint more socialist, union, extremists or communist czars?
make friendly with dictators or would be dictators like Chavez, Zelaya?
to develop a Muslim Sympathic nation in the USA by supporting the election
Ahmedinajad; bowing to Saudi family;
declaring the US one of the "largest muslim nations in the world"?
Or to "Fundamentally Change America" with his chosen thugs as supported by the rich white banks?

Rush has it right. Obama doesn't reallybelieve what he said in his speech to the students. His handlers came up with one they knew would play well with the opposition. If he was really speaking from his heart he would not have had to use a teleprompter.

It was NEVER about the content for me, it was about who was delivering it. Hard for me to let my kids listen to someone who I have no respect for. I respect the office he holds and I pray for him, but I do not like what he is doing to this country.

NEVER NEVER NEVER look at the hand this administration is extending to you as in the school speech. Don't go for the rope-a-dope. Look at what's in the hand he hasn't extended. That's where their real intentions are. Wake up Boortz! The vaunted research staff you just praised is letting you down.

The point is no President should have the luxury of speaking to a captive audience of children regardless of how innocuous or benign the message. Obama making the address in itself is political: it is one thing to speak to adults or college students; another to speak with grade school children. Off your high horse now Boortz, please.

#1- The man thinks he's a f**king KING.
#2- At least he's genuine enough to treat our chirrens with the same arrogant dismisiveness as he does all us adults.
#3- Liars find it hard to look people in the eye, so what should we expect?

Obama isn't the first president to use his influence to try to dierect the children in this country in a positive direction. I just wish he'd thrown in something about taking care of your own health through exercise. Kennedy started something that should be continued (or started back up I mean). It was the President's Council on Physical Fitness.
Schools (Government, at least) have the most pitiful requirements for physical education. It is important to keep the body strong. It will help the children to do better in classes. The need for medications to make children behave will become unnecessary. Childhood obesity will become a problem of the past.
I remember competitions in school: Who could do the most pushups, situps, etc... rope climbing, pullups...
That was due to the President's Council on Physical Fitness.

Now we have fat kids on meds to make them compliant... they heard the speech. It was good.

Although I am not a fan of B.O. and he is scary in many ways, the speech was harmless. He imposed his community leader skills and did a good job.

Neal, you can sit there and repeat yourself until you're blue in the face, but everyone I have talked with didn't want Obama's speaking to our kids because of the associated lesson plan. Yes, they were concerned about the speech too, but it was always the lesson plan that accompanied the speech that everyone was concerned with.

So do everyone a favor; move on to a different topic. You don't have kids in school but your audience does. Don't pretend to tell us why we were against this speech.

Alas, he spoke too long. One kid I heard of that saw it said he just repeated the same thing over and over for the length of the speech. Sort of like that old Gary Larson cartoon of the guy talking to the dog, and the dog hearing his name, and the rest being garble.

Obama is of low moral character and should not be addressing a captive audience of children.