Why Obama’s Address to Schoolchildren Is Objectionable

[Excerpted from an article by Michael S. Rozeff at LewRockwell.com]:

[I] have seldom read stronger words in newspapers directed against those who object to Obama’s speechmaking to children. They are being called crackpots. They are being accused of demonizing the President. They are being accused of McCarthyism. They are being accused of being racist, completely insane, and members of the right-wing lunatic fringe.

These attacks are not called for. There are very good reasons to object to Obama’s speech. I’ll sum up the ones that bother me. There are no doubt others, but I have made no attempt to research them and find out what others are thinking on this matter.

1.The speech is beyond the President’s constitutional powers.
2.The President is supporting a national role in education, which also is unconstitutional.
3.The President is not supporting his oath of office, so he is conveying an anti-constitutional message to children.
4.The President is crossing a boundary between the political and social spheres. That boundary is in place in order to control government power and maintain a healthy free society.
5.The President is augmenting national power and influence.
6.The President is starting a new precedent that has dangerous implications.
7.The President’s speech cannot possibly be non-political. The very act itself is politically in furtherance of government and an enhanced government role.
8.The President also leads his party, and that fact may influence children.
9.The President may have an undue influence over children due to his position and power.
10.Will fairness considerations lead to equal time for opposition leaders?
11.Presidential access to communications is dangerous enough without extending it to youth.

[Ben says: Yup.]