November 22, 2014

In defense of Michelle Obama

This may be a very confusing or contradictory post. Or not. I don't know, my thoughts are all over the place.

Going through my feeds this morning, I came across this from theblaze: #ThanksMichelleObama If you're vehemently against "supporting" a conflicting view by clicking on that link, I'll sum it up for you. That hashtag is trending around the country; Twitter users are showing many school lunches that are obviously less than tasteful, and the nutritional content could be easily debated.

No one is above criticism, no one. But I just want to go and ask each one of these kids if Mrs. Obama made a surprise visit to their cafeteria and she herself forced this specific food upon them. Do you really think this was her goal in her healthy lunch program?

Politics today, as a whole, is just one knee-jerk reaction after another, and theblaze article (and the sentiment of the trending hashtag) is case-in-point.

The author would like to take a moment to remind you that he thinks President Obama will go down in history as the worst President in the history of the United States until now. But I think that because of his policies. I believe that his ultimate goals of power are obvious compared with the altruistic prefaces he puts on them. Whether or not he understands what is at the end of the power-grab road that he is on, I can't figure out; though I'm still leaning toward he having a puppet-master somewhere.

This is not limited to President Obama, or even the Democratic Party, but I believe they are the worst abusers of public trust right now. Though I could point to several examples that are "Democrat" led (cough cough "Affordable" Care Act), I want to go back to the schools with Common Core.

Is anyone really against improving the education system? Just answer the question, please. No caveats, just that simple question: Are you for or against improving the education system. Now, there's a couple of problems that happen immediately after this question:

  1. Without getting into all the questions of "What constitutes improvement," or Federal v. States involvement, etc, I say the simple problem lies in all the add-on garbage. Specifically: "Data elements include or will include newborn screening (genetic) data; preschool screening including socioemotional (mental health) data; biometric data (like iris scans); homework; assessments, that according to the federal government will now include measurement of psychological characteristics; parental voting status and religious affiliation; extra-curricular activities; college data; income; and other employment data." - See more here.
  2. If you oppose common core because of one or all of these privacy intrusions, you're a monster that hates children and wants to murder puppies (cats, of course, are already evil, so you likely have one on your lap right now).

Loosely tying it all together, what do they say is their goal, and is their plan designed to solely accomplish that? I know that you have to measure progress in order to see if you were successful, but I fail to see how those intrusions fit in to the goal of improving education.

Back to Michelle Obama. Is she asking a barrage of unrelated personal questions and wanting intimate details about your family in order to move towards having a healthier lunch and healthier kids? No. She doesn't deserve this treatment. Her husband does, but not her. #stopthekneejerk

No comments: