Obama and Indoctrination

On Tuesday, President Obama spoke to children in schools across the nation. His supporters tell us that the president had no intention of indoctrinating America’s students. A look into the time warp of history should tell us a great deal about Obama and his beliefs concerning education. This should help us determine whether or not people have a right to be outraged over the fact that the president addressed school children.

Do you remember William Ayers? He is an avowed radical, left-wing terrorist. Maybe you also remember that the president was once chairman of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC). Who do you think started this organization, which was founded to improve the educational quality of Chicago schools? That’s right, Bill Ayers.

At the outset, in what kind of educational instruction do you think a radical, left-wing terrorist believes? If you guessed “radical, left-wing educational instruction,” you are correct.

The CAC was founded upon the idea that achievement scores are not very important. Instead, teachers should focus more upon instilling in both students and parents a desire to become politically radical. This is due largely to the fact that Ayers believes the American system is totally corrupt and oppressive. In fact, he said, “capitalism promotes racism and militarism.”

You are probably thinking, “Okay, Bill Ayers is a left-wing kook, but what does that have to do with the president talking to school children?” The connection between these two men and educational philosophy is so strong that you would have to overlook it on purpose in order to miss it.

Most of you are probably aware that President Obama has written two autobiographies. The only real executive experience of his life came during his chairmanship of the CAC from 1995 to 1999. Would it surprise you if I told you that he never makes mention of this in either of his two books? It shouldn’t.

He hasn’t told us about this experience because he doesn’t want us to know about his educational philosophy. While chairman of CAC, Obama conducted leadership seminars for ACORN, whose representatives then worked for him. All the while, money from CAC was being funneled to left-wing groups such as ACORN. However, money was denied groups who promoted more traditional approaches to math and science education. Obviously, this money disbursement strategy fits with the overall noted educational philosophy of both Ayers and Obama.

Don’t parents have the right to be concerned about the president speaking to their children? First of all, the majority of Americans believe that the public school system is not a place for politics. Civic instruction should be left to talking about the importance of voting and being involved in your community. The details of voting and community service should be left for discussion in the homes of the students. In other words, this should be the prerogative of a student’s parents—not his teachers.

Secondly, the president’s educational philosophy is one of a radical nature. As noted, Obama, as chairman of the CAC, promoted a view of teachers as community organizers. He wanted teachers to focus more on teaching kids about the evil nature of their communities, culture, and country instead of focusing on traditional instruction.

With these things being true, how could anyone disparage a parent, or any other concerned citizen, who didn’t want the president to speak to America’s school children? The educational philosophy of the president and his top aides at the Department of Education seemingly go against those of the majority.

To be certain, I support Obama’s right to have his own opinion concerning education. I just wish he would come to understand that people are exercising their freedom to disagree with his philosophy.

The federal government has already come to own several banks, not to mention two automobile manufacturers. It now desires to completely control the nation’s healthcare system. Enough is enough! It isn’t Obama’s “stay in school” message that scares people. Instead, it is the combination of our nation’s rapid leftward lurch and Obama’s radical, left-wing educational philosophy. The fact that Obama’s aides at the Department of Education originally developed an extremely questionable curriculum to accompany his speech only made things worse.

I personally don’t like the idea of any president addressing all of America’s school children. As I said, politics is something for children to discuss with their parents at home. Even if a political discussion does occur at school, it shouldn’t be “led and directed” by the president.

The president and the federal government are involved too much in our everyday lives, as evidenced by the president speaking to a captive audience of school children. President Obama needs to leave educational instruction “to the States respectively, or to the people.” For that was the original intent of the Framers of our Constitution.

--As Appeared in The Daily Mississippian on Friday, September 11, 2009