Michelle Malkin on Hannity discussing the Chicago US Annenberg Challenge

by Smitty

[unofficial transcript bits]

"People have to understand the context, timing, and culture of this speech."
...
"It's not about the text. He'll actually deliver a very innocuous speech. I can guarantee you that. But in these classrooms that are living laboratories for left-wing activism, what your are going to get are over-zealous teachers, teacher's union brass, who are in the hip pockets of the Democrat party, urge their kids to write letters, to demonize ObamaCare opponents, to call them opponents of change."

Meanwhile, Daphne of Jaded Haven is having none of this:

My children are not pawns. I have every expectation that their public education will be rhetoric free. I should be able to vet any blatant political message passed through our schools. My sons will not be viewing this historic piece of political claptrap, I could not give a good damn about Obama's benign educational message. He is using his bully political platform in an inappropriate manner and this family is more than glad to quietly dissent.

Whatever sycophants are advising the President, somebody has got to tell him to lay off the kids.

Increasingly less nonsense will be tolerated from the man. Going after the kids promises to bring enough momma bears roaring out of the woods that even a narcissist with his head parked halfway up his digestive tract is bound to hear something. Will the Community Organizer in Chief expend double digits off of his approval rating on this misguided venture? Why yes; yes, he could.

Allahpundit seems hardly clueful on the matter.

One pap-filled 20-minute speech about working hard and serving others is so lethal a threat to tender minds that they have to be yanked off the premises for the day to shield them from it? Or is this more of a protest in principle at the idea of the president giving a captive audience of schoolkids a pep talk on civics?
...
Irresistible exit question: If it's true that "state indoctrination of children is a hallmark of totalitarian government" (never mind that various subtle forms of indoctrination are happening in schools constantly), does that mean atheists were right all along in opposing prayer in public schools?

Michelle dispatched the opening paragraph in the Fox clip above. The stereotypical Allahpundit exit question, often interesting, is unintelligible here. The First Amendment reads as follows:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Thus, the same amendment protecting speech also separates church and state. Where the country has gone off the rails is allowing Critical Theory to drive towards a separation of church and culture. Into this breech steps an ideologically driven President.

So, amongst all of the people who should give their actions review, the atheists may want to consider whether the current situation is at least somewhat predicated upon their focus on the relatively innocuous.

As Michelle notes above, the speech itself won't dare offer ammunition to critics, any more than a brief, benign, ecumenical public prayer. The fact that this is the overture to the Chicago Annenberg Challenge writ large is what should concern us all.

Update:
Carolyn Tackett:

My daughter recently told me that she appreciates that my grandkids wear uniforms at their charter school. I have no doubt that soon all children at public schools will be wearing uniforms as well. Won't they look nice in those cute little brown shirts?

Update II:
VA Virtucon has a minor confidence builder.

Update III:
Obi's Sister has a disturbing cartoon, plus an excellent roundup.

Update IV:
Instapundit brings in some reaction from a couple of local schools. Sounds like there may be some life left in the American public school system, but I wouldn't get too enthusiastic just yet.