My comment may have sounded like “mocking” – but I was accurately portraying the way some of the rhetoric was flying over on the Delphi political forum that day. The assumption over there was that indeed the original speech was heavy in indoctrination.

– hp

I am not defending the “indoctrination” claims with that reply.

As I said, I am defending my original claim.

Let’s be honest here. The speech Obama gave yesterday is not the speech he originally intended to give. Is it very different? Probably not. But it is different, nonetheless. And trying to deny that doesn’t set the table for a very effective arguement.

Which was refuting your original mocking claim.

Obama had actually planned to give a radical communistic speech attempting to indoctrinate the children – all in an attempt to recruit them into a socialistic Obama Youth corps with revolution on their minds! Thank goodness for our saviors and protectors on the right! They saw through Obama’s cynical ploy and forced him to change the speech at the last minute!

And now we know that is precisely what happened.

“and I don’t think we even know if anything actually was”

I think the word “scrubbed” suggests changes were made. If all they did was look for potential changes, then “scoured” would have been a more appropriate word.

So – were the things removed (and I don’t think we even know if anything actually was) really examples of indoctrination? Or were they simply innocent phrases that might still be a target for someone looking to make trouble?

I suspect it is probably the later.

Case in point: We do know that the study guide originally included words saying “how can you help the President?” Those words are absolutely innocent – you really have to be insanely paranoid to believe they amount to an attempt at indoctrination. Still, the words were removed because innocent phrases can be twisted into scary stuff by someone really wanting to do so….

– hippieprof

As for what I did say….

I thought you would find this recent revelation interesting.

When critics lashed out at President Obama for scheduling a speech to public school students this month, accusing him of wanting to indoctrinate children to his politics, his advisers quickly scrubbed his planned comments for potentially problematic wording. They then reached out to progressive Web sites such as the Huffington Post, liberal bloggers and Democratic pundits to make their case to a friendly audience.

So – you don’t actually buy into the “Obama is a Nazi organizing an Obama youth” bit do you? You seem too reasonable for that. He may have altered his words slightly – but I can assure you that indoctrination was never on the table.

– hippieprof

But all sarcasm aside….

Who is responsible for Obama changing the wording from talking about what students can do to help him to what they can do to help themselves and America? It might have only been 1 idea, 1 line, or even 1 word. But as candidate Obama so elequently informed his democratic party opponent, “Words matter.”

Let’s be honest here. The speech Obama gave yesterday is not the speech he originally intended to give. Is it very different? Probably not. But it is different, nonetheless. And trying to deny that doesn’t set the table for a very effective arguement.

– hippieprof

Q: Did Obama change his back-to-school speech in response to pressure from conservatives?

A: One exercise in the accompanying lesson plan was reworded.

FactCheck.org

People who are taking credit for the so-called changes in President Obama’s address to students are either incredibly gullible, completely off their rockers or flat out lying.

Follow the link for details.