WH withdraws call for students to 'help' Obama

[Donger]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/02/wh-withdraws-call-students-help-obama/

President Obama's plan to inspire the nation's schoolchildren with a video address next week erupted into controversy Wednesday, forcing the White House to pull out its eraser and rewrite a government recommendation that teachers nationwide assign students a paper on how to "help the president."

Presidential aides acknowledged the White House helped the U.S. Education Department craft the proposal, which immediately was met by fierce criticism from Republicans and conservative organizations who accused Mr. Obama of trying to politicize the education system.

White House aides said the language was an honest misunderstanding in what was supposed to be a inspirational, pro-education message to America's youths.

Among the activities the government initially suggested for prekindergarten to sixth-grade students: that they " write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president."

Another task recommended for students immediately after listening to the speech: to engage in a discussion about what "the president wants us to do."

The novel curriculum plan brought sharp criticism from conservatives, including some who complained that classrooms were being used to spread political propaganda.

In response, the White House last night confirmed they were revising the lesson plan that was distributed last week by the U.S. Department of Education.

"We're clarifying that language," White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said.

By Wednesday evening, the sentence asking children to think about how they can "help the president" had been replaced.

The rewritten line said students should "write letters to themselves about how they can achieve their short-term and long-term education goals.

These would be collected and redistributed at an appropriate later date by the teacher to make students accountable to their goals."

Mr. Vietor said the reaction to the lesson plan may not have been so strong had the curriculum been circulated after people heard the speech, which he said does not mention any political issues and does not stray from a clear message encouraging children to excel and stay in school.

The speech is "about the value of education and the importance of staying in school as part of his effort to dramatically cut the dropout rate. It's not a policy speech," Mr. Vietor said.

But the revisions did not appear in time to head off the rapid-fire reaction that spread all day on conservative-oriented talk radio and Web sites. Critics of the president argued that some of the messages included in the " menu of classroom activities" strayed dangerously close to politicizing the classroom.

"While I support educating our children to respect both the office of the American president and the value of community service, I do not support using our children as tools to spread liberal propaganda," said Jim Greer, chairman of the Florida Republican Party.

The conservative radio host Dana Loesch even urged parents to keep their children home on Tuesday, the day Mr. Obama's speech is schedule to air.

Not everyone was outraged by the president's decision to send a videotaped message to America's schoolchildren something President George H.W. Bush did 18 years ago, though without the accompanying homework.

"I can't think of anything less partisan than this," said Mo Elleithee, a Democratic strategist. "It's admirable that President Obama would challenge our schoolchildren to do their best, and it's the kind of message that most level-headed Americans can easily get behind."

Mr. Elleithee called the moral outrage " beyond silly" and said it was " the kind of hyper-partisanship that people so soundly rejected last November."

Longtime political analyst Norman Ornstein said he viewed the strong reaction to Mr. Obama's speech as a sign of the coarsening of American politics.

"The fact that a standard issue speech by a president, with a good, common sense, even conservative message about education, school, hard work and perseverance, is being hit hard by the right tells us how dysfunctional our politics are, how shrill the discourse is getting from the president's foes, and how some people are blinded from common sense by their visceral hatred for Obama and his side of the aisle," Mr. Orenstein said.

The idea of adding a lesson plan to the package of materials being sent to schoolteachers was hatched during meetings between the White House and officials from the Department of Education.

The lessons themselves were developed by educators, White House officials said. But some of the assignments, they later conceded, may appear to be inartfully worded without also knowing the context of the speech.

"Does the speech make you want to do anything?" is one suggested question for the discussion. " Are we able to do what the president is asking of us?"

The packet of activities was sent out electronically with an Aug. 26 electronic letter from U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan. Mr. Duncan encourages school administrators to air the presidential broadcast, which was timed to coincide with the start of school for most of the country.

"The president will challenge students to work hard, set educational goals, and take responsibility for their learning," Mr. Duncan says in his letter.

Of the activities, Mr. Duncan added: "These are ideas developed by and for teachers to help engage students and stimulate discussion on the importance of education in their lives."

[patteeu]

Incompetent and full of himself.

[Amnorix]

While speaking to school children might not be unconstitutional, I would find trying to politicize them highly objectionable. Very bad idea.

[Donger]

Incompetent and full of himself.

I cannot believe that this administration had the gall to attempt to use this "address" as a tool to solicit help for Obama from children.

It really is quite revolting.

[Otter]

Hope
Change
Transparency...

Bullshit!

[Inspector]

Kids could write letters to themsleves about what they can do to help our country

[Donger]

Perhaps Obama was just trying to play on JFK's immortal words?

"Ask not what Obama can do for you. Ask what you can do for Obama!"

[HonestChieffan]

They have a lot of problems with these "misunderstandings".

[Amnorix]

Hope
Change
Transparency...

Bullshit!


Merely for the record, it appears that Jefferson never said what your .sig says he said.

http://wiki.monticello.org/mediawiki/index.php/The_democracy_will_cease_to_exist

Status: This exact quotation has not been found in any of the writings of Thomas Jefferson. It bears a very vague resemblance to Jefferson's comment in a prospectus for his translation of Destutt de Tracy's Treatise on Political Economy: "To take from one, because it is thought that his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, ‘the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry, & the fruits acquired by it.'"<SUP class=reference id=_ref-2>[3] (http://wiki.monticello.org/mediawiki/index.php/The_democracy_will_cease_to_exist#_note-2)</SUP>

[petegz28]

I am waiting to the assignments in the classrooms that are to write Obama letters on getting out of Iraq!

[mlyonsd]

These guys in the administration need to be exposed as the elitist pricks they truly are.

[Garcia Bronco]

Gosh I hate to say this, but this sounds like Hitler Youth Lite. If you want to help Kids Obama...do what Reagan did...Presidential Fitness Program.

[BucEyedPea]

Gosh I hate to say this, but this sounds like Hitler Youth Lite. If you want to help Kids Obama...do what Reagan did...Presidential Fitness Program.

Even that isn't the president's job.

[Garcia Bronco]

Even that isn't the president's job.

Indeed you are right, but it would be a good thing. Certainly better than this.

[BucEyedPea]

Indeed you are right, but it would be a good thing. Certainly better than this.

Yeah, well, that's the reason the left uses to justify Obama's attempt at being National Headmaster of our schools.

[Chief Henry]

Gosh I hate to say this, but this sounds like Hitler Youth Lite. If you want to help Kids Obama...do what Reagan did...create a better enviroment for bsn. owners to create jobs for the kids parents.

fyp

[ROYC75]

Oh now hush, Obo knows he needs more Obots, what better place to find them than the schools where they do not know what is going on in his administration.

Obo and kids,Calipari & WWW , kinda like a hand in a glove, it fits.

Obo is on the recruiting trail.










My how far we ( our country ) has fallen.

[ROYC75]

Maybe he wants Mr. Van Jones to teach them about politics, ya know, democrats and republican's, he can teach them how to call somebody an asshole, even in school.

[Otter]

Merely for the record, it appears that Jefferson never said what your .sig says he said.

http://wiki.monticello.org/mediawiki/index.php/The_democracy_will_cease_to_exist

Status: This exact quotation has not been found in any of the writings of Thomas Jefferson. It bears a very vague resemblance to Jefferson's comment in a prospectus for his translation of Destutt de Tracy's Treatise on Political Economy: "To take from one, because it is thought that his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, ‘the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry, & the fruits acquired by it.'"<sup class="reference" id="_ref-2">[3] (http://wiki.monticello.org/mediawiki/index.php/The_democracy_will_cease_to_exist#_note-2)</sup>

That's going to be a tough one to prove at this point either way but thanks for the insight.

Since I have your attention; I believe it was you who recommended "Iron Coffins" in the WWII thread. Outstanding, heart wrenching, in perspective book that I'd offer to anyone.

I'd take my chances with a rifle on land any day.

[BucEyedPea]

fyp

I like it. Better yet, have the govt stand aside so the private sector can create those jobs and we stay a free country instead of becoming mired in statism.

[Garcia Bronco]

Yeah, well, that's the reason the left uses to justify Obama's attempt at being National Headmaster of our schools.

I was in the PFP in the 80's. All Virginia public schools were and the Gun never came to school to address us. There was no video tape played or anything like that.

[BucEyedPea]

I was in the PFP in the 80's. All Virginia public schools were and the Gun never came to school to address us. There was no video tape played or anything like that.

Yeah, well my kid has received the Presidents Award for Academic Excellence 4x too. Still, there should be presidential nothing.

Although, I will admit, these are far less interfering than what Obama's doing which is more steps towards nationalization of our schools which are supposed to be under local control. He's acting like some sort of National Headmaster inculcating the kids in statism.

[vailpass]

Reason #897976653 I send my kids to private school. Dear Leader's propaganda is not mandatory nor will it be distributed at our school.

[wild1]

"Hey kids, write yourself letters about how great the president is and how devoted you are to him! Meditate on his holiness and your boundless love for him."

[ChiefaRoo]

Vote him out in 2012

[vailpass]

Vote him out in 2012

If he isn't removed from office before then.

[Amnorix]

That's going to be a tough one to prove at this point either way but thanks for the insight.

I suppose, but the source seems to be pretty legit. :shrug:

Since I have your attention; I believe it was you who recommended "Iron Coffins" in the WWII thread. Outstanding, heart wrenching, in perspective book that I'd offer to anyone.

I'd take my chances with a rifle on land any day.

Yes, Iron Coffins -- a book I recommend to anyone interested in military history. Freaking amazing. And yeah, screw being on a sub during WWII. :eek:

[Amnorix]

If he isn't removed from office before then.

For what, exactly?

[memyselfI]

I would tell my kids to take an "F" and write that they will be no one's robots.

[orange]

I would tell my kids to take an "F" and write that they will be no one's robots.

ROFL

[HonestChieffan]

I would enjoy hearing the long term education goals of children K-6. Especially Kindergarden.

This entire thing creeps me out.

How many teachers will just shut the thing off?

[Rooster]

They have a lot of problems with these "misunderstandings".

They really do. His whole staff is damage control.

[BucEyedPea]

Flashback 1991: Gephardt Called Bush's Speech to Students 'Paid Political Advertising'

As Barack Obama prepares a nationwide broadcast to America's students next Tuesday, it has been revealed that Democrats complained in 1991 when then President George H. W. Bush broadcast a speech from a Northwest Washington junior high school.

In fact, the House Majority leader at the time, Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.), said "The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students." [ I disagree with the last part as well.]

News Busters (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/09/03/flashback-1991-gephardt-called-bushs-speech-students-paid-political-a)

[HonestChieffan]

lest we forget old DG was a moonbat before it was popular

[wild1]

I would enjoy hearing the long term education goals of children K-6. Especially Kindergarden.

This entire thing creeps me out.

How many teachers will just shut the thing off?

I just spoke with a friend of mine last night, who teaches 5th grade.

Her school has been inundated with angry phone calls and emails demanding that the speech not be shown. The principal recommended that teachers not show it just to minimize trouble.

A few teachers wanted to show it anyway, so the school is requiring permission slips to opt-in, and accommodating the rest with an alternate learning activity.

[memyselfI]

ROFL

So parenting equates to indoctrinating robots??? Got it. ROFLROFLROFL

[Nightfyre]

Wow. How absurd. Does Obama think before he does stuff? I imagine he will take a beating from both sides of the aisle on this one. If I was a parent, this would piss me off to the point of calling/bringing it up at the pta meeting.
Posted via Mobile Device

[ROYC75]

Obo is recruiting more Obots, Look out everybody.

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a362/Ed6445/marching-robots.gif

[SHTSPRAYER]

As an observer of the Oba-Hussein Administration strategy and tactics, which increasingly seems to misjudge the minds of the American people and bask in the narcissistic glow of accolades from their core admirers and bought supporters, it occurred to me that the choice of Tuesday September 8th to try to hog the national news scene has much to do with another MAJOR event taking place on that date at 8:00 a.m. in Santa Ana, California.

Federal District Court Judge, David O. Carter, will begin hearing the Obama eligibility case brought by Orly Taitz on behalf of Presidential candidate Alan Keyes and some 200 military clients, who all demand Obama provide valid documentation to prove he is eligible to be President of the USA and also to be Commander in Chief and issue/approve military orders.

President Clinton appointee, Judge Carter, a highly decorated combat Marine, has pledged to prevent procedural ploys to become obstacles to taking the matter to trial. Nor will he reportedly entertain delaying tactics.

As a military/naval officer, he is well aware of the legal challenges facing officers and men who carry our orders that could be or are illegal if the Commander in Chief is not eligible to hold that position.

Specially now that the Obama administration is showing how perfidious it can be in defending the actions of our men trying to defend us and our land with the purely political attacks on the CIA people who did what they had to do to protect us by getting critically needed information.

While a Democrat appointee, Judge Carter, a former Orange County Superior Court judge, is well known for his very measured and even handed handling of cases with the acquired specialty of expertise in handling complex cases.

From personal experience I have seen this assiduous (6 am to 2 am sessions if need be) judge refuse any technicality based argument from either side, including the prosecuting US Attorney office and go with his view of fairness and reality - while giving both sides all the opportunity they needed to make their case.

He recently handled the final aspects of an eight year long case brought by the Federal Government in various venues in the country, against the MEK (Mojaheddin-e Khalgh) an Iranian dissident group, which in reality was the fuel for the so-called Khomeini revolution and allied their Marxist-Islamist, Soviet run, activities to the Mullahs. The latter stole the revolution from the Soviets and later murdered some 30,000 MEK members they had arrested and killed them without trials, while they were in prisons around Iran.

FOX News will reportedly have cameras in the courtroom, which can comfortably seat only about 30 people but the Federal Courthouse has some very capable Technology employees who will certainly be able to pipe audio and video of court proceedings to large jury selection/gathering areas, so several hundred could be added to the on site audience.

The school children event may dilute but not blank out the probably very popular Santa Ana event. Do share this information with friends and colleagues.

http://www.antimullah.com/

[orange]

I would tell my kids to take an "F" and write that they will be no one's robots.

So parenting equates to indoctrinating robots??? Got it. ROFLROFLROFL

Dictating what to think to your kids - you equate that to parenting. Got it.

What are you going to do when your kids sign up for Americorps?

http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/jezebel/2008/10/michelle_bachmann_102108.jpg

"As a parent, I would have a very, very
difficult time seeing my children do this."

[tooge]

Heh, I've already taught my children that he is trying to take everything from people like us and give it to lazy people. They hate him.

[tooge]

I love the tactics of this admin. "ok everyone, lets write a little paper about how it is good to do everything the government says". After the fallout, they say "oops, we realize that didn't sound so good. On second thought, lets all write a paper about how we should do what our parents tell us." These guys are a joke.

[KC Dan]

Dictating what to think to your kids - you equate that to parenting. Got it.

What are you going to do when your kids sign up for Americorps?When my children are all grown up = >18yrs old, they can join Americorps or whatever the heck they want. But, when they are <18 yrs old, it is our choice (wife & I) what they do and we dictate to them not the feds. Education is between the states and the parents, the feds need to get the hell out.

[SHTSPRAYER]

Obama is a piece of shat.

[vailpass]

...After the fallout, they say "oops, we realize that didn't sound so good. On second thought, lets all write a paper about how we should do what our parents tell us." These guys are a joke.

Yes.

... But, when they are <18 yrs old, it is our choice (wife & I) what they do and we dictate to them not the feds. Education is between the states and the parents, the feds need to get the hell out.

And Yes again.

[orange]

When my children are all grown up = >18yrs old, they can join Americorps or whatever the heck they want. But, when they are <18 yrs old, it is our choice (wife & I) what they do and we dictate to them not the feds. Education is between the states and the parents, the feds need to get the hell out.

This is totally laughable.

Try keeping them out of school, Mr. Sovereign Citizen. Or send them to work.

But never mind the mere law... your children will present you with some hard lessons on what they think of Your Majesty.

[BucEyedPea]

This is totally laughable.

Try keeping them out of school, Mr. Sovereign Citizen. Or send them to work.

But never mind the mere law... your children will present you with some hard lessons on what they think of Your Majesty.

Is it a federal or state law?

Even if it's federal, that still doesn't give Feds any authority to act like a national headmaster over the schools politicizing education. That's what fascist and commies like to do- get to the young.

[KC Dan]

This is totally laughable.

Try keeping them out of school, Mr. Sovereign Citizen. Or send them to work.

But never mind the mere law... your children will present you with some hard lessons on what they think of Your Majesty.My two grown ones already have and they are two of the hardest working, fair-minded and compassionate young people that I know. So, thanks for the lecture, School Attendance Czar.

[orange]

My two grown ones already have and they are two of the hardest working, fair-minded and compassionate young people that I know. So, thanks for the lecture, School Attendance Czar.

Well, then they've obviously fallen far from the tree. o:-)

Fair-mindedly and compassionately, do they always agree with you?

When did they start disagreeing? Still WELL before 18, I bet.

[orange]

Is it a federal or state law?

Even if it's federal, that still doesn't give Feds any authority to act like a national headmaster over the schools politicizing education. That's what fascist and commies like to do- get to the young.

Child labor was banned nationally. Currently covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act, though there might have been an earlier name.

And as for "politicizing education," Obama's speech is nothing but boiler-plate stay-in-school go-somewhere-in-life truisms.

The only "politicizing" is from wingers who don't want their kids seeing "that man."

Put up your Obamajoker avatars again, everyone.

[BucEyedPea]

Child labor was banned nationally. Currently covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act, though their might have been an earlier name.

I was talking about compulsory education laws. Obama had originally asked the kids to help him and be their brother's keeper by making sure others got a good education. Then teachers will discuss that afterwards. Still, it's not the president's role to play headmaster to our local schools. This is an important idea.

Since you brought up child labor , it actually died out on its own in the free-market as families got wealthier by taking their kids out. The govt eventually made it illegal but it had already died out. We did a thread here on it. Well, the thread was about something else but it went into that.

[orange]

I was talking about compulsory education laws.

But now that you mention it, child labor died out on its own in the free-market as families got wealthier by taking their kids out. The govt eventually made it illegal but it had already died out. We did a thread here on it. Well, the thread was about something else but it went into that.

You stepped in it this time. My father quit school and went to work at his father's demand in 1915. He was eleven.

It had died out in well-to-do families. It was only the poor who had to sell their kids' futures.

[BucEyedPea]

You stepped in it this time. My father quit school and went to work at his father's demand in 1915. He was eleven.

No it didn't. Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938

That leaves plenty of time for it to die out....which occured over time not suddenly. Kids can still do farm work too.

[KC Dan]

Well, then they've obviously fallen far from the tree. o:-)

Fair-mindedly and compassionately, do they always agree with you?

When did they start disagreeing? Still WELL before 18, I bet.I see that you edited your response. Well, we currently have and have had in the past many disagreements. But, I am very adamant about the fact that it is MY role (with state-run eductation) to educate my children - not the feds. The Fed never has been and should never be a part of their general education.

My daughter just finished her degree in Education and will be a teacher soon. I know that unless forced to by a union or superiors ( & maybe not even then), she would NEVER expose her class to state-sponsored propaganda. Whether, she believed in it or not. She is very fair-minded and believes that the gov't is a hinderer not a helper. My son is becoming an electrical engineer and just wants everyone (gov't) to get out of his way so he can forge a life and he doesn't want to be limited or dictated to.

[orange]

No I didn't. Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938

That leaves plenty of time for it to die out....which occured over time not suddenly. Kids can still do farm work too.

The 1938 law is the one that finally stuck. It was tried earlier:

Federal legislation, however, initially proved unsuccessful. The Keating-Owen Act of 1916, which prevented the interstate shipment of goods produced in factories by children under 14 and in mines by children under 16, was struck down in the Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918) ruling. Likewise, the Pomerane Amendment of 1918, which taxed companies that used child labor, was declared unconstitutional in Bailey v. Drexel Furniture (1922) on the grounds that it was an unwarranted exercise of the commerce power of the federal government and violated states’ rights. In 1924, the Senate passed a Constitutional amendment banning child labor, but it was never ratified by enough states. Finally, the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 prohibited the full-time employment of those 16 and under (with a few exemptions) and enacted a national minimum wage which made employing most children uneconomical. It received the Supreme Court’s blessing.

[BucEyedPea]

The 1938 law is the one that finally stuck. It was tried earlier:

Federal legislation, however, initially proved unsuccessful. The Keating-Owen Act of 1916, which prevented the interstate shipment of goods produced in factories by children under 14 and in mines by children under 16, was struck down in the Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918) ruling. Likewise, the Pomerane Amendment of 1918, which taxed companies that used child labor, was declared unconstitutional in Bailey v. Drexel Furniture (1922) on the grounds that it was an unwarranted exercise of the commerce power of the federal government and violated states’ rights. In 1924, the Senate passed a Constitutional amendment banning child labor, but it was never ratified by enough states. Finally, the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 prohibited the full-time employment of those 16 and under (with a few exemptions) and enacted a national minimum wage which made employing most children uneconomical. It received the Supreme Court’s blessing.

And guess who opposed those attempts? Parents

That doesn't prove it wasn't dying out. I've been trying to find the thread and the evidence is sufficient.

[mikey23545]

<b>White House aides said the language was an honest misunderstanding in what was supposed to be a inspirational, pro-education message to America's youths.
</b>

Bullshit.

[orange]

And guess who opposed those attempts? Parents

Is there something in my previous posts that would lead you to believe I'm surprised that some parents were only too willing to sell their kids into a life of menial servitude?

The laws were enacted to PROTECT children from their parents' shortsightedness.

Also, Hammer v. Dagenhart should be on your short-list of beloved opinions. When it was overturned and rebuked in United States v. Darby Lumber Co., everything you claim to know about the Tenth Amendment was repudiated.

The amendment states but a truism that all is retained which has not been surrendered. There is nothing in the history of its adoption to suggest that it was more than declaratory of the relationship between the national and state governments as it had been established by the Constitution before the amendment or that its purpose was other than to allay fears that the new national government might seek to exercise powers not granted, and that the states might not be able to exercise fully their reserved powers.....

[KC Dan]

Is there something in my previous posts that would lead you to believe I'm surprised that some parents were only too willing to sell their kids into a life of menial servitude?Now, our gov't wants to force them into it with our approval and under the guise of "paying off college loans"...

[BucEyedPea]

Is there something in my previous posts that would lead you to believe I'm surprised that some parents were only too willing to sell their kids into a life of menial servitude?

The laws were enacted to PROTECT children from their parents' shortsightedness.

Also, Hammer v. Dagenhart should be on your short-list of beloved opinions. When it was overturned and rebuked in United States v. Darby Lumber Co., everything you claim to know about the Tenth Amendment was repudiated.
You have some serious and substantial omitted data:

Like what were some of those kids doing before having any job?
Often they were beggars on the street.

Most people lived in what we'd consider poverty today but they were coming out of it with the Industrial Revolution. It gave them a way out. Sure they had to work their way out which is what they did, whole families.That climb out is never overnight but it was an improvement from what they were doing before.

Then kids worked on farms before that with no outcry. Child labor was common before then too. In earlier times, parents often had to send off a 7 year old child to work in an aristocrats home as a maid or something in order to survive.

But there's much much more data...like a lot of the child labor in England were kids not from families but from homes for boys which were run by the state.

As the standard of living for families rose, the parents eventually took the kids out because they could then afford to...even put them in school. That's how it died out. They worked their way up and out of it. The same way that's always been the way up. Unless you prefer they remain beggars in the street.

The govt banning it simply trailed the trend. It had nothing to do with the govt protecting children from parents suffering short-sightedness because the practice died out.

Quoting any cases does not show what was happening in the market with improvements in standards of living since they didn't stick until after FDR's era, aka the culmination of the Progressive era which was beating down the idea of limited Constitutional govt for decades by then. Hammer v. Dagenhart was overruled in 1941 — well after child labor died out.

Your claims about mine on the 10th Amendment have no bearing either. Since it was the Progressive era that expanded Fed power more and more on that amendment virtually killing it. It's not supposed to be that way. They simply had progressive activists judges expand on what interstate commerce was. ( There was a reason FDR packed the courts.)

[memyselfI]

Dictating what to think to your kids - you equate that to parenting. Got it.

What are you going to do when your kids sign up for Americorps?

http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/jezebel/2008/10/michelle_bachmann_102108.jpg

"As a parent, I would have a very, very
difficult time seeing my children do this."


Actually, they are good kids and aim to please and thus would probably play along with the spectacle. I would give them permission to tell say 'F.U.' and take the "f" if they did not want to participate. I give them permission to opt out. Will the schools do the same?

[memyselfI]

Heh, I've already taught my children that he is trying to take everything from people like us and give it to lazy people. They hate him.

ROFL

I haven't gone that far but they were able to stand up in class and face fierce opposition in mock voting last year when they were telling their respective classes why Lite would be a huge mistake.

I never sat them down and told them that. They heard it by me discussing it with my friends or my husband or in casual conversation at the dinner table. Yet they were the one of a handful in each of their classes who did not vote for Lite or McCain. I think one of them voted for George Carlin and the other Ralph Nader.

They ended up voting way more liberal than I did. :hmmm:

[BucEyedPea]

( No I am not endorsing child labor. Just showing when this happened to die out)

You might be surprised to know that the laws against "child labor" do not date from the 18th century. Indeed, the national law against child labor didn't pass until the Great Depression — in 1938, with the Fair Labor Standards Act. It was the same law that gave us a minimum wage and defined what constitutes full-time and part-time work. It was a handy way to raise wages and lower the unemployment rate: simply define whole sectors of the potential workforce as unemployable.

By the time this legislation passed, however, it was mostly a symbol, a classic case of Washington chasing a trend in order to take credit for it. Youth labor was expected in the 17th and 18th centuries — even welcome, since remunerative work opportunities were newly present. But as prosperity grew with the advance of commerce, more kids left the workforce. By 1930, only 6.4 percent of kids between the ages of 10 and 15 were actually employed, and 3 out of 4 of those were in agriculture.[1]

In wealthier, urban, industrialized areas, child labor was largely gone, as more and more kids were being schooled. Cultural factors were important here, but the most important consideration was economic. More developed economies permit parents to "purchase" their children's education out of the family's surplus income — if only by foregoing what would otherwise be their earnings.

The law itself, then, forestalled no nightmare, nor did it impose one. In those days, there was rising confidence that education was the key to saving the youth of America. Stay in school, get a degree or two, and you would be fixed up for life. Of course, that was before academic standards slipped further and further, and schools themselves began to function as a national child-sitting service. Today, we are far more likely to recognize the contribution that disciplined work makes to the formation of character.

http://mises.org/story/2858

[orange]

( No I am not endorsing child labor. Just showing when this happened to die out)
http://mises.org/story/2858

Gee, Mises. How did I know that before you ever posted?

Here's a beautiful little graph showing the prevalence of child labor in America.

You'll notice two peak periods - just before the enactment of the FLSA and a recent one (migrant labor).

http://www.google.com/search?q=child+labor+in+us+history&hl=en&rlz=1T4GPTB_enUS288US288&tbs=tl:1&tbo=u&ei=dESgSs_4EZDssQPi0KmNDw&sa=X&oi=timeline_result&ct=title&resnum=11

Legal efforts to ban child labor began in the U.S. in the 1830's and went on continuously since. The claim that it was "supply and demand" fails in the face of reality.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Moreover, this part of your quotation is sinfully rich and delicious:

In wealthier, urban, industrialized areas, child labor was largely gone, as more and more kids were being schooled... In those days, there was rising confidence that education was the key to saving the youth of America. Stay in school, get a degree or two, and you would be fixed up for life.

Yes - due to compulsory education!

[BucEyedPea]

Gee, Mises. How did I know that before you ever posted?
Gee! How did I know that the first link inside yours was the NY Times.

Here's a beautiful little graph showing the prevalence of child labor in America.

You'll notice two peak periods - just before the enactment of the FLSA and a recent one (migrant labor).

http://www.google.com/search?q=child+labor+in+us+history&hl=en&rlz=1T4GPTB_enUS288US288&tbs=tl:1&tbo=u&ei=dESgSs_4EZDssQPi0KmNDw&sa=X&oi=timeline_result&ct=title&resnum=11



Legal efforts to ban child labor began in the U.S. in the 1830's and went on continuously since. The claim that it was "supply and demand" fails in the face of reality.

Show me how that graph was compiled including if just the US, or ww, before I accept your numbers. I just don't want it to be like "Hands Across America's" stats when they got their numbers from college towns. Particularly when banned years like 1990's, and with 2000 are at the highest ever for child labor. Or it's confusing. And farm labor doesn't count. You really want to run with that graph?

Then one of the links in there traces back to socialist sources like Eugene Debs. Socialist data isn't reliable in my book as they hate markets and enterprise.

Oh, and I didn't say it was supply and demand either you put that there on your own. I said it died out due to the market. Ya' know workers standards improving, parents putting them in schools. Those things are partsof the market because it deals with the choices people make. Human action at work dealing with scarce resources.

Once again, just because there were efforts by people to stop it legally, didn't make it illegal yet. That didn't happen until 1938. You seem to keep ignoring that fact. So attempts are irrelevant until it's officially banned.

[HonestChieffan]

Sounds like this is blowing up. Locally it sounds like the school switchboard was a hot one today and one board member told me he had no idea what they were talking about when his phone started to ring.

Seems parents are a bit upset.

[KILLER_CLOWN]

Utah Principal Apologizes for Showing Pro-Obama ‘I Pledge’ Video to Students

Breitbart.tv

<object classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" id="cs_player" width="425" height="330"><param name="movie" value="http://eplayer.clipsyndicate.com/cs_api/get_swf/3/&pl_id=8178&hue=224&page_count=15&windows=1&show_title=0&va_id=1082753&auto_start=0&auto_next=1"></param><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://eplayer.clipsyndicate.com/cs_api/get_swf/3/&pl_id=8178&hue=224&page_count=15&windows=1&show_title=0&va_id=1082753&auto_start=0&auto_next=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="330"></embed></object>

The Salt Lake Tribune: A school principal has apologized for showing a video at an assembly that a politically conservative group leader is calling “radical, leftist propaganda.”

[wild1]

Sounds like this is blowing up. Locally it sounds like the school switchboard was a hot one today and one board member told me he had no idea what they were talking about when his phone started to ring.

Seems parents are a bit upset.

I posted something earlier in the thread that was happening at a school where a friend teaches. Their phones are ringing off the hook and they will require a permission slip to watch it. I saw a report just a few moments ago that said a school district near to me has opted out completely.

It's a good grassroots movement against this cult of personality stuff like making posters and writing love letters to Our Leader, and it's having an effect.

I will bet that many, many schools since this furor erupted - even if they are showing the speech - will shy away from the hero worship stuff the White House is suggesting. I'll bet the speechwriters have had to rewrite this to be more sterile now. Mission accomplished for the resistance.

[HonestChieffan]

I posted something earlier in the thread that was happening at a school where a friend teaches. Their phones are ringing off the hook and they will require a permission slip to watch it. I saw a report just a few moments ago that said a school district near to me has opted out completely.

It's a good grassroots movement against this cult of personality stuff like making posters and writing love letters to Our Leader, and it's having an effect.

I will bet that many, many schools since this furor erupted - even if they are showing the speech - will shy away from the hero worship stuff the White House is suggesting. I'll bet the speechwriters have had to rewrite this to be more sterile now. Mission accomplished for the resistance.

Will this be declares astroturf by the Obama people, Pelosi, others? How awesome it is to see the involvement.

[orange]

Once again, just because there were efforts by people to stop it legally, didn't make it illegal yet. That didn't happen until 1938. You seem to keep ignoring that fact. So attempts are irrelevant until it's officially banned.

You're the one ignoring the facts.

The earliest legal restriction on child labor in the U.S. was a Massachusetts law in 1837 which prohibited manufacturing establishments from employing children under age 15 who hadn’t attended school for at least three months in the previous year. Legislation enacted before 1880 generally contained only weak restrictions and little provisions for enforcement. In the late 1800s, however, social pressure against child labor became more organized under leaders such as Florence Kelley, Edgar Gardner Murphy and Felix Adler. By 1899, 44 states and territories had a child labor law of some type. Twenty-four states had minimum age limits for manufacturing employment by 1900, with age limits around 14 years in the Northeast and Upper Midwest, and no minimums at all in most of the South. When the 1900 Census reported a rise in child labor above levels of 1880, child labor activists responded with increased efforts including a press campaign and the establishment of the National Child Labor Committee in 1904. (Ironically, recent research suggests the Census was in error and child labor was already on the decline by 1900.) By 1910 seventeen more states enacted minimum age laws and several others increased age minimums.

http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/whaples.childlabor

That's a good article overall. I think it's the source of your "6.4% in 1930" and other numbers above in #63.

As for that graph (which I've tried but been unable to repost here) - I THINK it shows the Total Number of children employed in each year. I wish there was a clear key to it, but I have not found one. It looks like an experimental page by Google which hasn't got the bugs out yet. But total children employed would make sense because that would go up due to population booming even though the percentage was coming down.


My overall point here is that Child Labor Restrictions and Compulsory Education Laws worked hand-in-hand to get most children out of the labor force - and the FSLA sealed the deal in 1938.

[BucEyedPea]

Yes - due to compulsory education!

Education wasn't compulsory everywhere at first. Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay settlements had compulsory laws in the seventeenth century. So how did kids work in the factories of the industrial revolution later? Wouldn't that contradict you claims of your graph that they were laboring?

NE was still the first to pass such laws. ( think it was 1850) It wasn't until 1918 that the nation had adopted it.

Rises in enrollment also was due to population increases not compulsion.

[orange]

Compulsory education:
NE was still the first to pass such laws. ( think it was 1850) It wasn't until 1918 that the nation had adopted it.


Most states by 1900. The South was a decade late. Of course, we knew that already.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0112617.html

[BucEyedPea]

You're the one ignoring the facts.

The earliest legal restriction on child labor in the U.S. was a Massachusetts law in 1837 which prohibited manufacturing establishments from employing children under age 15 who hadn’t attended school for at least three months in the previous year. Legislation enacted before 1880 generally contained only weak restrictions and little provisions for enforcement. In the late 1800s, however, social pressure against child labor became more organized under leaders such as Florence Kelley, Edgar Gardner Murphy and Felix Adler. By 1899, 44 states and territories had a child labor law of some type. Twenty-four states had minimum age limits for manufacturing employment by 1900, with age limits around 14 years in the Northeast and Upper Midwest, and no minimums at all in most of the South. When the 1900 Census reported a rise in child labor above levels of 1880, child labor activists responded with increased efforts including a press campaign and the establishment of the National Child Labor Committee in 1904. (Ironically, recent research suggests the Census was in error and child labor was already on the decline by 1900.) By 1910 seventeen more states enacted minimum age laws and several others increased age minimums.

http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/whaples.childlabor

That's a good article overall. I think it's the source of your "6.4% in 1930" and other numbers above in #63.

As for that graph (which I've tried but been unable to repost here) - I THINK it shows the Total Number of children employed in each year. I wish there was a clear key to it, but I have not found one. It looks like an experimental page by Google which hasn't got the bugs out yet. But total children employed would make sense because that would go up due to population booming even though the percentage was coming down.


My overall point here is that Child Labor Restrictions and Compulsory Education Laws worked hand-in-hand to get most children out of the labor force - and the FSLA sealed the deal in 1938.

Some contradictions:
Well then how can you claim they were working in the factories then if all that's true? ( which I am not sold on yet )

It says those laws were weak and unenforceable which means it didn't get rid of child labor Some say it was just on certain types of labor. Then it claims the 1900 Census [which is national] reported a rise in child labor above levels of 1880. So those laws still didn't do it. And when finally federalized by 1938 it had already died out.

[BucEyedPea]

Compulsory education:



Most states by 1900. The South was a decade late. Of course, we knew that already.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0112617.html

Compulsory laws still did not lead to increases in school enrollment.The common school movement only substituted public attendance for private attendance.


Folger and Nam studied school attendance in the late nineteenth century. They found that between 1850 and 1890, three-fourths of enrollment growth was due to population increases, while only one-fourth could be attributed to actual increases in enrollment. Their findings indicate that compulsion is a very weak factor in increasing attendance.[6]

The Common School Movement and Compulsory Education (http://mises.org/story/1679)

[BucEyedPea]

Compulsory education:



Most states by 1900. The South was a decade late. Of course, we knew that already.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0112617.html

So what happened to all the children laboring you claimed was still going on after 1900, including the example of your father?

[orange]

Some contradictions:
Well then how can you claim they were working in the factories then if all that's true? ( which I am not sold on yet )

It says those laws were weak and unenforceable which means it didn't get rid of child labor Some say it was just on certain types of labor. Then it claims the 1900 Census [which is national] reported a rise in child labor above levels of 1880. So those laws still didn't do it. And when finally federalized by 1938 it had died out.

It had NOT died out. The percentage was down, but the real number of child laborers was higher than ever. The efforts to ban child labor were an ongoing campaign for almost a century. Things don't happen overnight, especially when human blockheadedness is concerned.

There are laws against speeding. I'll bet you still see speeders from time to time.

[orange]

So what happened to all the children laboring you claimed was still going on after 1900, including the example of your father?

By the time any law came up in Colorado, my Dad was past the age limit. He spent his life working in factories or driving a cab... except for a brief period during Prohibition when he ran a speakeasy. "Jerry the Fox" was put out of business by unrestricted capitalists of the Don Corleone variety.

[BucEyedPea]

It had NOT died out. The percentage was down, but the real number of child laborers was higher than ever. The efforts to ban child labor were an ongoing campaign for almost a century. Things don't happen overnight, especially when human blockheadedness is concerned.
I said earlier it had died out and not overnight but you seemed to think the Federal govt's ban resulted in that. That's not true. I wish I could find that old thread as I had some links to when it died....and it was in the 1900s but before 1938 about 20 years before that, iirc. Definitely not on the cusp of that legislation. It also had the trends that were happening like improved standards of living for families which made it no longer necessary for survival. Before then child labor was more of a norm on planet earth.

There are laws against speeding. I'll bet you still see speeders from time to time.
Well, in so many words, I said that regarding your father having to work at age 11 in 1900 something. See that we agreed.
And just in case, saying something died out means widespread practice. There's certainly a few you might still find.

[BucEyedPea]

By the time any law came up in Colorado, my Dad was past the age limit. He spent his life working in factories or driving a cab... except for a brief period during Prohibition when he ran a speakeasy. "Jerry the Fox" was put out of business by unrestricted capitalists of the Don Corleone variety.

LMAO Oh well my grandfather was a unrestricted capitalist Sicilian that owned a pasta factory.

[HonestChieffan]

LMAO Oh well my grandfather was a unrestricted capitalist Sicilian that owned a pasta factory.

Any good pasta recipes? Lot more productive than the debate you are in with dillwad.

[BucEyedPea]

Any good pasta recipes? Lot more productive than the debate you are in with dillwad.

I HATED pasta by the time I moved out of the house. Sick of it!

I eat it now but not weekly. I'm into French cooking now.

[BucEyedPea]

Orange, do you have any kids?