>>>>>>>>It surprises me (although maybe it shouldn't) that our politics remain as polarized as they were for the past 16 years. The conservative backlash against Obama's speech to school children today is a perfect example. People keeping their kids home so they don't have to hear it, saying Obama is trying to push a socialist agenda. A draft of the speech has been released and there is no socialist or any other agenda other than "stay in school." How can that be objectionable? But it is. If he said the sun rises in the east there would be some who would rant and rave about it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I guess you missed the news where the final speech was modified after the huge response? The draft you are reading is not the original one.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Got any evidence that the gist of the speech was changed, or that the edits were anything more than the usual tweaking that any speech gets?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>They changed the lesson plan language.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>That's correct. There was at least one badly worded item (though anyone who wasn't looking for a problem would have understood what it meant originally).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>This whole thing was a tempest in a teapot from some people on the right who spend way too much time trying to discredit this administration.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Tamar
>>>>>
>>>>>The same thing pretty much happened back in 1991 when Bush gave his speech to the kids. I guess they figure turnarounds fair play... :o)
>>>>
>>>>No comment on whether your assertion that the speech was rewritten (depoliticized) was in error?
>>>
>>>I don't need to. It's all over the media. It was rewritten to change the lesson plan language. I already wrote that above (it's here in this message up above).
>>>
>>>Here is what I wrote exactly:
>>>
>>> guess you missed the news where the final speech was modified after the huge response? The draft you are reading is not the original one. They changed the lesson plan language
>>
>>The lesson plan isn't the speech. You said "the final speech was modified after the huge response." I'd like some evidence that the content (meaning) of the speech was changed in response to the fuss. I agree that the lesson plan was changed.
>>
>>Tamar
>
>What fuss? I must've missed something. I was just pointing out how the content provided to the kids has changed after the fuss in the media, not here. From what I read and heard on the news, the change in the lesson plan was due to the concern from parents and others who complained. I'm not supporting the side that fussed about it, I'm just pointing out that it changed prior to be presented.
>
>Everyone sure seems angry about all of this when I don't think anger is necessary. I thought we were having a discussion. If my post was misleading or misinterpreted, then I apologize for that. I sometimes post in a hurry and I am not careful enough about the words I use which I think can be misinterpreted at times.

I posted two links from unbiased sources showing the change (singular) to the draft by the Dep't. of Education was trivial. This whole "controversy" was ginned up by the enemies of Obama and reform. Truly, they will stop at nothing. What's sad is people who should know better parrot them and spread the FUD.