Wake County school board chairman Ron Margiotta is not objecting to schools showing President Barack Obama's second annual back-to-school speech on Tuesday.
As noted in today's article, Margiotta had objected last year to the speech being shown in school and unsuccessfully tried to get his fellow school board members to vote on the issue. Margiotta, then in the board minority, had said "we just don't need political figures to take over our schools."
But Margiotta said that, based on how innocuous last year's speech was, he's not objecting this time.
“I don’t think it will be a problem,” Margiotta said Thursday. “It didn’t turn out to be as bad as we thought last year.”
The state Republican Party is also dialing down the criticism. Last year, state GOP Chairman Tom Fetzer had urged schools not to air the speech.
Fetzer isn't making the same request this year for schools not to show the speech. But Fetzer said Friday that he still considers it inappropriate for Obama to take away teaching and learning time by making the speech during the school day.
Individual Wake principals will decide whether to air the speech. Some might send home consent forms while others might just wait to see if any parents object.
Margiotta urged parents who are uncomfortable about the speech not to keep their kids at home Tuesday. He said concerned parents should notify the principal to see about doing an alternative activity when the speech is shown.
UPDATE
Click here to view the text of Obama's speech on Tuesday.
Comments
I just want to point out
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 11:42 — jenmanI just want to point out that Margiotta has always opposed having elected officials of any party speak at schools. Obama's speech last year was not the first time. I don't necessarily agree with his view but just wanted to clarify.
Ruh Roh, Snibbidy Learns Learns a Lesson
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 09:39 — gregishereOh, Ron, the Margiotta of our Times, how in the world did you learn? Why, it seems you said something idiotic and partisan and silly and knee-jerk last year, and, um, this year, you decided that what you said last year doesn't apply. Hmmm... did you really really really think the President was going to Kenya-nize all our precious childrens in his speech last year, and then, um, this year, well, he's not? Or maybe now everyone is paying attention to you and now you realize if you say such patently stupid things people call you funny names and laugh at you. So, now you just say those things to your friends and say something more politic now, hmm? Well, maybe not, but, hey, thanks anyways for not be a jerk about this.
So...
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 09:43 — Bob_SconceThe big difference is that last year he was pushing his health-care scheme and there was suspicion that he'd use his speech to schoolchildren to push his political goals. As it turns out, that didn't happen.
"As it turns out, that
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 12:29 — RGRGRG"As it turns out, that didn't happen"
Who knew, right? That our President just wanted to urge children to study hard and stay in school? By the way, has any GOP politician apologized for their insane rhetoric?
Cold day in -----
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 13:27 — Bob_SconceWhen was the last time ANY politician apologized for insane rhetoric? There's an election coming up; it's only going to get worse. And you're nuts if you think that the Democrats aren't just as bad as the Republicans.
"This Guy????" He is the President
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 09:17 — CottonelleThat anyone would talk about the President of the United States the way many are, is absolutely disgraceful. That anyone would refuse to let their children listen, that highly partisan members of school boards across the United States turn their backs on the elected President of the United States is a disgrace. Why are many citizens of this country not showing support for our government ? Because they think highly paid partisan actors on TV are the speakers of truth. If any one can actually state TRUE facts about why they disparage the sitting president of the United States other than shouting unfounded ugly slogans, THEN DO IT. Until then, your name-calling is disgraceful.
Here we have a guy -- Obama
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 09:13 — woodstockHere we have a guy -- Obama -- who has failed at almost every aspect of of his Presidency; he's brought us massive and unending unemployment not seen since the Great Depression, poverty levels we have not seen since the 1960s, one of the worst housing markets ever and misspent 100s of billions of taxpayer dollars, and he is going to talk to our kids about education. If he is an example of the best our schools can produce, God help us all.
Please get out and vote this November.
What led to this downturn?
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 10:46 — CottonelleWhat led to this downturn? A twenty year period of Republican sponsorship and bi-partisan co-sponsorship of two important laws, and shenanigans in between, the Garn-St. Germain Financial Institutions Act of 1982 passed upon the advent of Ronald Reagan's presidency and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 on the advent of George Bush's presidency, which allowed the great Wall Street Casino GROPE (the Greatest Robbery of the People Ever) whereby ordinary players saw investments halved or wiped out, and some not so ordinary such as States' Retirement Funds, etc. This GROPE has not been returned in the form of jobs and economic growth. Add NAFTA and the China Trade Agreement which were all accomplished before Barack Obama's presidency, and we see that nothing has changed in the scheme of things. The man of color is the whipping boy, left to clean up the mess.
That's one take
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 10:58 — Bob_SconceAnother take is that it was the Community Reinvestment Act and similar policy which encouraged reduction of lending standards such that sub-prime borrowers could take out 0-down mortgages. I don't claim that this is correct, but it seems clear that had the old lending standards -- 20% down, no more than 28% of income spent on mortgage and no more than 35% spend on debt repayment -- continued to apply, the downturn never would have happened.
The bigger point is that economists have yet to reach consensus about what happened. Paul Krugman has one view, Gary Becker has another, and they're both Nobel Laureates.
That's what I meant by shenanigans
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 13:09 — CottonelleThey were going on long before 1982. Good outline on Wikipedia: "Timeline of the United States housing bubble"
Another take is that it was
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 11:15 — jeffrey1Yeah, so...
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 11:42 — Bob_SconceI didn't really go into a whole lot of the detail there because I'm trying to avoid the subject. Here's one take on Countrywide: http://cafehayek.com/2010/09/whose-fault-was-it.html and more on the CRA: http://cafehayek.com/2008/09/the-role-of-the.html
There are other sources for similar views -- those just happened to be the easiest to find. My main point isn't that Roberts is correct here, only that the jury is still out.
Obama is in line to get
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 10:26 — red_balloonObama is in line to get credit for fixing the mess or making it worse. Either way, he certainly didn't create this mess.
Either way, he certainly
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 11:18 — woodstockEither way, he certainly didn't create this mess.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Did he initialte the down turn? No. But, it is pretty clear that this "mess" has been enormously exacerbated by his "solutions:" massive government bailouts of companies underserving of bailouts and so-called "stimulous" funding (a misnomer if ever there was one) ...money that would have been much better spent by theAmerican public and businesses.
Remember that the bailout
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 11:54 — red_balloonRemember that the bailout strategy was implemented by his predecessor. Regardless, enough of this topic lest I lose attraction to the magnet theme. :)
Remember
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 17:00 — Solon77Go back to the depression - preceded by the GOP.
When the magnets are gone (soon to come) then what are you going to do for sport ?
A most unfortunate remark
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 12:35 — red_balloonA most unfortunate remark when the intent is to remedy the current magnet based discrimination and move toward equitable funding for all children.
You heard to huh
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 09:45 — g88ky07I heard this weekend from several good sources that 80% of the magnets will be gone by Christmas!
Come on Woodstock.
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 09:37 — exYank_WCprinyou know as well as I, that it was 25 years of borrowing on the part of govt AND private and business that has caused much of this bubble (AND I include Clinton..so don't lump me in with your "leftish-socialist-communist rant)...not counting the fraud that has been committed by financial institutions (govt and private.)
Also Bush initiated TARP (100's of billions) and yes IMO Obama mispent the "stimulus" partly because he has the same crew (Geithner and Summers) that represent the powers that got us into this mess and who have benefited the most from the bailout.
Obama is no more in control of this country than Reagan, Clinton, or Bush were.
Learn to READ
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 05:38 — PACK_MIKE77Because when you become president you have to read from this thing called a teleprompter.
He couldn't read
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 17:02 — Solon77That was George's problem - he couldn't read.
Very inspiring. Work hard so
Sat, 09/11/2010 - 12:54 — red_balloonVery inspiring. Work hard so that you can clear up other people's mess. Work hard so that you can pay for the profligacy of the people before you. Motivating indeed.
Morining Chuckle
Sat, 09/11/2010 - 11:10 — bluedaisyThank you Keung, for my morning chuckle - -
Margiotta, then in the board minority, had said "we just don't need political figures to take over our schools"
Text...
Sat, 09/11/2010 - 10:08 — Bob_SconceThe Whilte House has already released the text of the President's speech; not much to see:
As you start a new school year, I wanted to remind you about why you are in school, and why it's important that you stay in school and go on to college. Frankly, you need to stay in school because for the past 50 years, we in Washington have blown it.
This year, we borrowed about one and a half trillion dollars and next year we'll borrow even more. The people your parents elected have, collectively, borrowed over thirteen trillion dollars, and by the time you graduate from high school, that number may be over twenty-five trillion. And that doesn't include money which your government has promised to pay in the future through Social Security and Medicare. Even your state governments have been in on the act -- your state government have been promising huge pensions to its employees without setting up any way to pay for them.
Why has this happened? Why is your government so in debt? The answer is pretty simple -- it's full of politicians. Every politician knows that giving away money is a great way to buy votes. But, raising taxes to pay for that money is a great way to lose votes. So, for about 50 years, politicans have been buying votes today by promising money in the future. But, by the time it comes to pay for that money, the politician is long retired, living off a huge pension that he voted for himself.
But, what does this have to do with you and school? You will need a good education if you are ever going to pay back all of the money that we politicians borrowed. That means that if you earn a hundred dollars, we'll probably take sixty of it. If you work really hard, you might be able to pay back enough that your children or your grand-children won't have to.
So, stay in school. Work hard. We're counting on you to get this country out of the mess that I, and people like me, caused.
Bob you forgot to say........
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 09:54 — exYank_WCprinbut even if you are lucky enough to get a job will be a low paying service job supporting those making over $250,000. (because 10's of millions were moved overseas in the last 10 years by the government and corporations) it
Heck even computer science degrees aren't worth anything because you can hire a Vietnamese for 1/5 the salary of an American. Who said we lost the war? They're a capitalist country just like we wanted. Doesn't that beat it all...we send the working class to Nam so 58,000 can die and the Vietnamese can take the veteran's children's jobs. Ah Bob, but you missed the part about the draft and having to sacrifice for your country...yours was the "gimmie it all generation."
Bob just let me know how I can get a job like yours, so I can get paid to blog 24/7? Talk about productivity!
You'd better be happy about unemployment insurance and the bailout, or some people may march up Capital Blvd and disturb your wonderful life in Wakefield.
A great diatribe from
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 11:18 — willynillyA great diatribe from someone too affraid to face facts after dropping charges and running off. Still affraid to see my evidence of the skill of the WCPSS in trying to get rid of people who don't toe the party line? Maybe you and Dan can meet me in the next couple of weeks. Then again, if you are a principal for this county maybe you already know how the WCPSS can railroad people.
If you want me to see
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 14:11 — danofncIf you want me to see whatever evidence you have, I'm game. I just don't know where you live, and the area I'm willing to travel to see your evidence is quite limited.
In all honesty, if it's as convincing as you think it is, I think you should file a lawsuit, a complaint, or whatever your "next step" would be, or you should get over it.
You have said here, I think, that you refused to use methods that didn't work. If those methods were the accepted methods for the district, then that makes you insubordinate. You apparently made a choice to stick with your guns, and I suppose you can be commended for that....but you can also be fired for it.
Almost everyone has had a job where they thought "the suits" were doing the wrong thing. They are still "the suits", though.
Face the facts
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 12:31 — exYank_WCprinYou were an inadequate teacher and you were removed. Stop your whining and move on in another field.
And you are a coward.....I
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 15:21 — willynillyAnd you are a coward.....I am still teaching and proving my worth. My challenge still stands. Maybe you are one that likes to do these things to teachers who do not agree with you? When they prove you wrong?
Disagree...
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 10:29 — Bob_SconceJust about completely, but this is not a blog to talk about trade barriers. I will note that the Smoot-Hawley Tariff is well-documented to have made the Great Depression far worse.
Great Depression, Great
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 15:24 — jeannie84Great Depression, Great Recession
BY E. WAYNE STEWART
FOUR OAKS -- In these troubled economic times, passionate discussions often center on the Great Depression, Franklin D. Roosevelt and his New Deal. Did FDR and his train of government agencies deal a good hand to millions of Americans?
They did. Roosevelt used the government to provide relief, recovery from the Depression and reform of the economic system. Americans' quality of life improved.
The New Deal brought relief to most Americans. Voters responded by electing FDR to an unprecedented four terms in good part because of his popular programs to help "the Forgotten Man." No amount of conservative spin or revisionist history can change this fact. In the 1936 election, FDR carried 46 of the 48 states.
As conservatives cried "the economy will work itself out in the long run," Harry Hopkins, a Roosevelt adviser, famously replied: "People don't eat in the long run, they eat every day." Sound familiar today?
FDR called for "bold, persistent experimentation" to help Americans. The gold standard was abandoned to stop deflation and stabilize farm and manufacturing prices. The FDIC was created to restore public confidence in the financial system and to protect small depositors. The Glass-Steagall Act required banks to divest themselves of securities operations, separating investment and commercial banking operations. (This was enacted to reduce commercial bank involvement in stock market investment. This act was repealed in 1999, unfortunately.)
The WPA employed about 8.5 million Americans over its seven-year history, in projects that were not to compete with private business. The REA provided loans to local cooperatives that took electricity to 90 percent of rural homes by 1939, up from about 10 percent in 1930. This prompted private business to extend service into the countryside and to lower rates. The TVA brought jobs and electric power to seven states.
The very popular CCC addressed the problem of jobless young men between the ages of 18 and 25. Conservation projects changed the landscape of America over the nine years of the program. The Social Security Act of 1935 assured retirees a pension and benefits for the unemployed.
In 1933, the civilian unemployment rate was nearly 25 percent. If we count people in work-relief jobs as employed, the jobless range was about 10 percent by 1940. During FDR's first term, GDP grew at an annual rate of about 9 percent. The GDP grew about 11 percent annually after 1937-38.
The Great Depression did not end with conservative demands for cutting taxes and spending, or reducing government activity or decreasing the debt. The enormous fiscal stimulus - yes, government borrowing, taxing and spending - to finance World War II led the U.S. out of the Depression. The debt rose from $43 billion in 1940 to $258.7 billion in 1945. The unemployment rate fell to 1.2 percent in 1944. The national debt was fully 121 percent of GDP, compared with an estimated 95 percent today.
A cutback in New Deal spending in 1938 resulted in an economic contraction. The economy expanded again in 1939 as spending increased. Taxing, borrowing and spending - government stimulus - brought the United States out of the Great Depression.
After facing personal economic ruin and our capitalistic system gone awry, did millions of innocent, unfortunate victims appreciate the government help? Did the New Deal programs help get them back on track? You betcha!
Yes...
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 16:11 — Bob_SconceI remember reading that, too. It's a popular take on the Great Depression which is being reexamined by economists and historians today. I wouldn't expect an adjunct professor at a community college to be particularly up-to-date on such matters. ExYankPrincipal derided Amity Shales work as 'revisionist,' but I recommend reading it anyway.
So..in your cute little text
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 12:27 — exYank_WCprinyou mock Obama, the government, and all politicians (or just Democrats?) So..you've given up on the republic, or you think the group getting elected this Nov will be different??
As you know Bob the reason we have this debt is because in Sept-Oct-Nov 08 and then in March 09 we stood at the abyss. Most everyone has forgotten how bad it was. My guess that you and your revisionist friends (The Forgotten Men - Amity Shlaes) would have liked the government to do nothing, let it all crash and then rebuild from the ashes. (Melon philosphy)
Yes, as any high school student (who got an "A") knows. SH Tariff was one of 6-7 reasons for the Great Depression. A good read..Lords of Finance-Ahamed
Pfft...
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 13:13 — Bob_SconceSo, I deliberately didn't name any political party in that. Apart from that, I'm not getting into it. Believe what you like.
Bravo, Bob
Sat, 09/11/2010 - 13:42 — TrailerParkGirlIf a politician had the honesty, insightfulness and guts to actually make that speech, he/she would have my vote every time they ran for office.
I would just add:
Another reason to stay in school. So, you can see through us politicians and our political smokescreens and economic shell games.