Mr. Obama says, "Your not important Dad."

Pages: 1 2

Index »
Community »
Debate and Serious Talk »
Mr. Obama says, "Your not important Dad."

2008-07-16 23:23:27

(T)eflon(S)hadow: R.I.P. Neda; +456|6870|Grapevine, TX

So now the best thing that has happened in my life time, I don't really matter, Mr Obama?

Presidential nominee Sen. Barrack Obama (D-Ill) told the American Federation fo Teachers this week that if he gets the “real change” he wants, government employees will have have the largest impact on the lives of children rather than families.

Barrack Obama wrote:
Real change is finally giving our kids everything they need to have a fighting chance in today’s world. That begins with recognizing that the single most important factor in determining a child’s achievement is not the color of their skin or where they come from; it’s not who their parents are or how much money they have. It’s who their teacher is.

Wrong. Families still hold the primary responsibility of educating children and helping them succeed. Tell that to Tiger Woods Mr. Obama. Or my proud 6 year old daughter.
______________________________________________________________________________________

1. How can I expect this man to Lead my country if he doesn't believe I can lead my own kid?
2. You really have to think about where he is coming from to make a statement like that.
3. Where do his kids go to school? Public or Private?
4. Ill answer the first one: *^!#$ #^*

I have to shut this off; to sleep..

2008-07-16 23:25:22

S.Lythberg: Mastermind; +429|6488|Chicago, IL

family >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> teachers in deciding a child's outcome.

2008-07-16 23:28:10

Morpheus: This shit still going?; +508|6040|The Mitten

Well, duh... he was at the 80th Convention of the American Federation of Teachers.

EE (hats

2008-07-16 23:29:06

Reciprocity: Member; +721|6622|the dank(super) side of Oregon

If you'll note the semicolon in that sentence. I think he's referring to socio-economic class rather than the actual contribution parents make to a childs development.

2008-07-16 23:32:26

Morpheus: This shit still going?; +508|6040|The Mitten

Reciprocity wrote:
If you'll note the semicolon in that sentence. I think he's referring to socio-economic class rather than the actual contribution parents make to a childs development.

This was also just the pre-speech preparation (or whatever). Without actually hearing it, it's hard to say what he really meant, as phrasing can't really be conveyed on paper.

EE (hats

2008-07-16 23:32:51

Blehm98: conservative hatemonger; +150|6504|meh-land

Reciprocity wrote:
If you'll note the semicolon in that sentence. I think he's referring to socio-economic class rather than the actual contribution parents make to a childs development.

yeah, what he means is 'Your place in society won't matter according to what race/economic class your parents were, but it will matter according to whom you decide to learn your lessons from'

tbh

i can see from where the misunderstanding is derived though

2008-07-16 23:33:37

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6194|what

Way to take his message out of context.

2008-07-16 23:34:33

Morpheus: This shit still going?; +508|6040|The Mitten

TheAussieReaper wrote:
Way to take his message out of context.

It's what people do best.

EE (hats

2008-07-16 23:48:42

(T)eflon(S)hadow: R.I.P. Neda; +456|6870|Grapevine, TX

Out of context? Ill find an audio clip. I'm sure McCain will say something that I dont like, too.

If Im wrong Ill admit it.

2008-07-16 23:50:28

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6716|Canberra, AUS

Out of context.

And even that's hard to do, the moment I read that, I thought he meant as in 'what your parents status is' - i.e. just because dad's an ultrarich CEO doesn't mean you're set for life.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2008-07-16 23:51:05

Morpheus: This shit still going?; +508|6040|The Mitten

(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:
Out of context? Ill find an audio clip. I'm sure McCain will say something that I dont like, too.

If Im wrong Ill admit it.

Ok. But keep in mind he's talking to a bunch of teachers. I doubt he'd say that to a bunch of parents.

EE (hats

2008-07-17 00:02:31

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6194|what

You've taken this quote out of context. He was talking to teachers, about teachers. Not families about teachers. Not families about families.

I'll prove it, and show you where you went wrong:

That begins with recognizing that the single most important factor in determining a child’s achievement is not the color of their skin

He asserts that the colour of a childs skin should not be a determining factor in the level of education they receive. It is unfortunate, but many black people do not believe a higher education is an achievable goal, and there is an obvious view that non-white minorities should be better represented in colleges.

or where they come from;

Poor states, bad education systems, different syllabus? Many factors can determine a child's ability to reach college, including the basic level of schooling each state offers.

it’s not who their parents are or how much money they have.

This is the really important part, "or how much money they have." He is talking about socio-economical factors. When he says or who their parents are, he's talking about the rich parents who are going to be able to better afford paying for their childs tuition, text books, even enrol them into private school. This isn't down putting parents. I'd say the opposite. He wants to help the parents who can't provide their child with these things and improve the child's quality of life.

It’s who their teacher is.

As has been said, he is talking to teachers. He is arguing that improving the level and standard of teaching is going to benefit a child the greatest. Who is he telling this to again? The teachers. If you tell them they are important and should focus on providing the best level of education they can, of course they are going to believe in lifting their standards and the standards they teach with as a whole.

I wouldn't be surprised if this accompanied a number of steps to improve the quality of teachers themselves, but evaluating the way teachers are taught to teach, providing better pay for performance, etc.

2008-07-17 02:23:52

Braddock: Agitator; +916|6331|Éire

TheAussieReaper wrote:
You've taken this quote out of context. He was talking to teachers, about teachers. Not families about teachers. Not families about families.

I'll prove it, and show you where you went wrong:

That begins with recognizing that the single most important factor in determining a child’s achievement is not the color of their skin
He asserts that the colour of a childs skin should not be a determining factor in the level of education they receive. It is unfortunate, but many black people do not believe a higher education is an achievable goal, and there is an obvious view that non-white minorities should be better represented in colleges.

or where they come from;
Poor states, bad education systems, different syllabus? Many factors can determine a child's ability to reach college, including the basic level of schooling each state offers.

it’s not who their parents are or how much money they have.
This is the really important part, "or how much money they have." He is talking about socio-economical factors. When he says or who their parents are, he's talking about the rich parents who are going to be able to better afford paying for their childs tuition, text books, even enrol them into private school. This isn't down putting parents. I'd say the opposite. He wants to help the parents who can't provide their child with these things and improve the child's quality of life.

It’s who their teacher is.
As has been said, he is talking to teachers. He is arguing that improving the level and standard of teaching is going to benefit a child the greatest. Who is he telling this to again? The teachers. If you tell them they are important and should focus on providing the best level of education they can, of course they are going to believe in lifting their standards and the standards they teach with as a whole.

I wouldn't be surprised if this accompanied a number of steps to improve the quality of teachers themselves, but evaluating the way teachers are taught to teach, providing better pay for performance, etc.

AussieReaper has hit the nail on the head. It was not a detracting comment towards parents but rather an affirmative comment about providing an equally high level of education to all American children.

/thread

2008-07-17 04:46:35

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|6798|Argentina

TS I think he tried to say that teachers are important, not more important than parents, and that they should be paid accordingly to their important job helping kids to achieve their goals despite their color or their origins. We got it, you don't like Obama.

2008-07-17 06:57:36

HollisHurlbut: Member; +51|6038

I will stipulate that the context of the highlighted segment of the quote ("it’s not who their parents are") does not, it would seem, convey the message, in and of itself, that teachers are more important than parents. However, we can see the thrust of the OP's point (that he stated teachers are more important than parents) is accurate because removing everything he says is not more important leaves us with:

The Barack Obamination wrote:
That begins with recognizing that the single most important factor in determining a child’s achievement is...who their teacher is.

The OP is right, but not for the portion he highlighted.

2008-07-17 07:15:50

Braddock: Agitator; +916|6331|Éire

HollisHurlbut wrote:
I will stipulate that the context of the highlighted segment of the quote ("it’s not who their parents are") does not, it would seem, convey the message, in and of itself, that teachers are more important than parents. However, we can see the thrust of the OP's point (that he stated teachers are more important than parents) is accurate because removing everything he says is not more important leaves us with:
The Barack Obamination wrote:
That begins with recognizing that the single most important factor in determining a child’s achievement is...who their teacher is.
The OP is right, but not for the portion he highlighted.

No, I disagree. You guys are reading what you want to read from this just because you don't like Obama. He was making the point that other social factors shouldn't play a major role in how well educated a child is if the teachers and the education system itself are good enough.

2008-07-17 07:32:53

ZombieVampire!: The Gecko; +69|5868

You're going to teach your child Physics?

2008-07-17 07:44:57

Locoloki: I got Mug 222 at Gritty's!!!!; +216|6681|Your moms bedroom

Obamas real dad left when he was 2 years old

and Obamas kids go to private school
"My kids have gone to the University of Chicago Lab School, a private school, because I taught there," Obama responded. "It was five minutes from our house. So it was the best option for our kids."

Obama knows how important father figures are to children, I think this quote is taken out of context. What he means is, whether your father is rich,poor, non-existent,dead, jailed, it shouldnt matter. Growing up, you will spend alot of interaction time with a teacher, maybe more than with your own dad. Think about it, you wake up, go to school, see your teacher until 2, your dad gets out of work at 5 you eat dinner, play video games watching tv and its bedtime. Youll want to spend weekends hanging with your friends and doing sports, (at least this was how my youth was spent)

2008-07-17 09:31:00

imortal: Member; +240|6706|Austin, TX

Blehm98 wrote:
Reciprocity wrote:
If you'll note the semicolon in that sentence. I think he's referring to socio-economic class rather than the actual contribution parents make to a childs development.
yeah, what he means is 'Your place in society won't matter according to what race/economic class your parents were, but it will matter according to whom you decide to learn your lessons from'

tbh

i can see from where the misunderstanding is derived though

...what you hope he means, rather.

2008-07-17 15:31:48

(T)eflon(S)hadow: R.I.P. Neda; +456|6870|Grapevine, TX

Touché, I stand corrected, thanks for clearing this up! I'll try to be more discerning in the future That's one of the things I know I can count here in the DS&T... both sides of a topic get to discuss and hopefully the "reader" will see the truth for what it is... most of the tym

_{moar karma handouts when available}

2008-07-17 15:55:52

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6486|The Land of Scott Walker

Understandable reaction, Teflon. We dads get downplayed far too much. When we do get publicity in the media, it's when some deadbeat isn't paying his child support or he's abused his children. No teacher is going to put me in a shadow if I can help it.

2008-07-17 15:58:04

God Save the Queen: Banned; +628|6384|tropical regions of london

oh god...the war on fathers now.

2008-07-17 15:59:51

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6486|The Land of Scott Walker

You dispute my statement?

2008-07-17 16:02:17

God Save the Queen: Banned; +628|6384|tropical regions of london

yes. dont victimize yourself.

2008-07-17 16:05:41

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6486|The Land of Scott Walker

The quality of my fatherhood doesn't change because of what the media says. However, that doesn't make it any less annoying that fathers are rarely portrayed in a positive light.

Pages: 1 2

Index »
Community »
Debate and Serious Talk »
Mr. Obama says, "Your not important Dad."

Board footer

Jump to

BF2S Forums Mr. Obama says, "Your not important Dad."

Barrack Obama wrote:

Reciprocity wrote:

Reciprocity wrote:

TheAussieReaper wrote:

(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:

TheAussieReaper wrote:

The Barack Obamination wrote:

HollisHurlbut wrote:

The Barack Obamination wrote:

Blehm98 wrote:

Reciprocity wrote:

Board footer