1.    The U.S. Department of Education (DOE) attempted to bypass not only parents, but also state and local school superintendents and orchestrate this event directly with building principals.  This initiative by our federal government violates the principles of parental involvement and local control of education.  Nobody voted on this reversal of our long-standing national education policy in this manner.

2.    The timing and objectives of this speech appear to be politically motivated.  The original "lesson plans" proposed by the DOE to accompany the President's speech were blatant in their attempts to enlist the support of our children to this President achieve his objectives (e.g., get his legislative agenda passed) and bolster his personal popularity.

3.    The stated purpose of the “address”; to encourage kids to stay in school and work hard at their studies is commendable and could have been promoted in many ways; instead the DOE chose to do it in a way that has been characterized as “Over the line” and “Creepy”.

4.    This "address" to the kids has been done with the same haste, ineptitude, and lack of foresight that has become the hallmark of this administration. 

5.    We should be sure to thank those superintendents and school boards who agreed to opt out of the President’s address on September 8.  They did the right thing and deserve our support.

6.    For those schools which have not opted out but will allow parents to request that their child be separated from the class during the “address”, we have misgivings about letting the children be separated as some sort of pariah.  We suggest instead either merely home schooling for a day or going to school with your kids and auditing the class.

7.    For those schools which have taken the hard line stance of requiring kids to attend the Obama address we suggest that kids be kept home regardless of whether the absence is regarded as excused or unexcused.  We also suggest that parents in these districts consider home schooling or enrolling their children in private school, and strongly urge them to become actively involved in meetings of their local school board, and in the elections of members of the school boards.

Partisan politics in Columbus Classrooms

            The decision of Columbus Schools to require participation in the Obama speech to public schools on September 6, and to mark any child who does not attend as an unexcused absence, should be reversed.

            This issue is not the President’s benign topic of staying in school or working hard.  The issue is not even the fact that the message would have been more compelling if it had been bi-partisan message from the President and his adversaries in the last election.

            The issue is the “creepy” way this has been done, and the precedent it establishes.  First of all, the US Department of Education bypassed not only state departments of education but even local school district superintendents and boards of education, and tried to pull this off directly with school principals.  It was done with the same haste and lack of forethought that has characterized much of our recent national legislation.  And the timing of this is suspect, coming at a time when this legislation is increasingly being questioned by the American public, and the President’s popularity appears to be in free fall.  The DOE’s suggested lesson plans are a blatant attempt to boost the President’s support.