wrote in message
...
On Sep 3, 9:40 pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:

This isn't a matter of Federal powers. This is the President excercizing
his
right to free speech. We all have that power, president or
candlestick-maker. Do you deny him that right?

No, I do not deny him that right. However in this case he is not
speaking as an individual. He is speaking as the President, that is
he is speaking as the head of the executive branch of the
government.


How is a speech denying your ability? Does that apply to all speech you
don't agree with? Are you suggesting that others' rights to free speech
don't apply if you don't like the speech?

Certainly not. But the right of free speech for individuals is not
the same as the rights of a government official. Or at least I think
it is. An example is that one has the right to put a cross in ones
yard, but a government official does not have the right to put a cross
in a federal building or to put words from the Koran or Bible on the
walls of a government building.

But he has a perfect right to speak those words -- as many (probably all)
presidents have done, and as most political officials do regularly. And
that's despite the separation of church and state as it's been established
in law.

This isn't the Federal government teaching moral values. This is the
President voicing his opinion about the positive consequences of staying
in
school and of studying hard. If you want to make a morality play out of
it,
go ahead. But it just sounds like common sense to me, and it's a matter
of
efficacy rather than one of morals.

Obviously we differ here.


Which tells us that this is not your real objection. Whether you know
what
your real objection is remains an open question. I suspect it's that you
don't want anything to confer legitimacy to anything Obama says, in any
way
you can think of. But that's only a suspicion.

It is more that I believe in States Rights. And do not want the
Federal government to expand it roles. I think you can find I have
had this belief during George W. Bushes terms as well as during Bill
Clintons terms of office.

I don't think that exhorting school children to do their best in school is
an expansion of the federal government's role. You may take issue with
federal funding and regulating of education, but that isn't what's at issue.


Working hard is not something I value. Working intelligently is not
the same thing. I would rather have my children question how thing are
done and find better ways, than to value working hard. Hard work is
greatly overrated.


But there's nothing to prevent you from telling them that all you want.
If
you think your kids won't be exposed to ideas you disagree with, you are
nuts. And if you want to prevent someone else from saying those things,
you
don't really believe in Constitutional principles

I do not object to individuals expressing ideas. In fact I believe in
the " marketplace of ideas ". But do not want any officials of the
Federal government to express views on topics that I do not believe
are in the area of the Federal governments business.

I believe that it is impossible for a president to fulfill his role without
doing so. The whole history of our establishment of the office of president
is that he (or she) is to be a leader, not a bureaucratic operative who
works in silence and says nothing. With the passage of time, leadership
inevitably involves leading change to adapt to changing circumstances. It
involves explaining and encouraging action by the public. It requires
exhorting Congress to take action. How one would lead without speech, to the
whole country or segments thereof as they're relevant, is hard to imagine.
..

I think you're blowing smoke, that all you want to do is de-legitimize
the
President, both in the eyes of kids and that of everyone else, no matter
what he says. The thing you fear the most is that he's successful and
that
people come to believe in his ideas. But that's just an opinion, as you
say.


I do not understand why you thinik I would want to de-legitimize the
President. I can not see how that would benefit me. I hope he is
successful in many things.
I just do not agree with all his ideas and hope he is not successful
in those things that I disagree with.

That sounds like you don't want him to be successful in his effort to lead
change in education. But that's one of the issues on which he campaigned,
and on which he was elected. It's his responsibility to lead those
changes -- and that requires speech.

I am still allowed to have opinions, aren't I ?

Of course. As is the President. And both of you are free to express them.

--
Ed Huntress