here's another adult...

[callmeslick]

The substance is, you tried to make a point that people should let progressive doctrination of young children occur, and not complain about it. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you even understood the article you linked; maybe you didn't.

show where any 'indoctrination' occurred. Please, go ahead and try. The person in question merely acted like a crude jerk because they didn't hear the little kids say the word 'liberty'. These are FIVE YEAR OLDS, for crying out loud. If they left the word out in a high school recitation, the point would be valid, but that isn't the case. I repeat, this was a KINDERGARTEN class! It's time for folks to stop looking for 'progessive', or for that matter ANY ideological indoctrination, over trivial matters. And, this was a really trivial matter.

[Barfly]

show where any 'indoctrination' occurred. Please, go ahead and try. The person in question merely acted like a crude jerk because they didn't hear the little kids say the word 'liberty'. These are FIVE YEAR OLDS, for crying out loud. If they left the word out in a high school recitation, the point would be valid, but that isn't the case. I repeat, this was a KINDERGARTEN class! It's time for folks to stop looking for 'progessive', or for that matter ANY ideological indoctrination, over trivial matters. And, this was a really trivial matter.

http://saltdox.blogspot.com/2008/12/sov ... youth.html

"Soviet Youth indoctrination begins in Kindergarten with stories of “Grandfather Lenin” that make him out to be a sort of Santa Claus figure to children throughout the world. In first grade children join the Little Octoberists, their first official Communist group. The good of the group is emphasized over that of the individual. They learn about their duty and social obligations to the Motherland. Loyalty to the state is emphasized over loyalty to family or oneself." I added italics and bold print.

Progressive attempts to indoctrinate children in the US is patterned after Soviet efforts, which obviously worked to a degree. Children around age 5 are at a critical period in their social development, you should know that, it shouldn't surprise you that a parent would be very upset at this sort of activity.

Back to your linked article: removal of "Liberty", or individual freedoms, from the standard pledge, supplemented by an additional school pledge which emphasizes citizenship. See what's happening? Emphasis on the collective value of the citizenship, not individual value or freedom. That's what you espouse as a Progressive whether you agree with it or understand it.

[callmeslick]

oh, please. You illustrate my point. Getting your panties in a bunch over nothing. There is ZERO evidence that any Soviet-style indoctrination was occuring, they simply failed to recite one word. Like I said, they probably left out 'indivisible', too. As for having a school pledge, most schools have that, and have for years. My daughter's elementary school had one, and probably mine did, too.....but, the latter is so far in the past as to be beyond memory. Celebrating 'citizenship' is now a bad thing? Really? Get real. I was taught classes in Civics, which is like Citizenship 101, not exactly what I'd call indoctrination, and, in fact, something that ALL kids ought to learn. Why? Because a huge amount of the issues of public ignorance we see these days is from people who haven't the first clue about how the nation, or it's government works, or the responsibilites of the citizenry involved in making it work.


edit-went back and read initial article, and all other articles I could find on the incident. First off, a host of other parents and school officials state clearly that Liberty is NOT purposefully left out of the pledge. Further, no mention of the word 'citizenship' in the school pledge, which centers on such radical, progressive concepts as cooperation, kindness and learning.

[callmeslick]

lets go to an updated article, from which I quote....my commentary in red:
" McGroarty said Friday he volunteers at the school once a week, working first with kindergartners on mathematics and computer skills, then with first-graders on art. He has children in those grades.so far, so good

He said Wednesday was the first time he was there to hear the kindergartners say the Pledge of Allegiance. He thought he heard the word "liberty" removed. But more importantly, he said, was that the pledge was immediately followed by students' recitation of the school creed. In it, students are asked to treat others with respect, follow school and classroom rules and "to try their best." He said he was upset they pledged this while still holding their hands over their hearts and facing the U.S. flag.blue hightlight is key....he 'thought' he heard something. Further,the school pledge doesn't seem like bad stuff to be teaching kids, and the fact that they still were standing facing the flag is simply proof that 5 year olds don't grasp the fine details of the process. Hardly scary stuff to anyone not looking to make mountains out of molehills

There should be a break between the pledges, he said, and students should not be facing the flag. He called it "conditioning a child" to blindly obey authority without knowing what is in the rules they are promising to obey. "In the beginning of the Hitler Youth movement, people made similar promises," McGroarty said.

At the time, McGroarty went to speak with the school principal, but was put off. He returned to the library and continued his work, but then asked a librarian to call the principal. When she refused, he said he told the children: "Children, do not blindly follow to swear allegiance and to follow rules without knowing what they are," and told the children to ask their parents about Nazis.and this conduct was age appropriate, how, exactly?

He then took his children home with him to Rockford. (Their mother has primary custody, but they were supposed to stay with him that night, McGroarty said.) The mother has since obtained an order of protection against McGroarty, and the children were returned to her. McGroarty has been banned from school property.seems that Mom feels this guy is a few bricks short of a full load, too.

McGroarty said the district is reacting out of fear in light of the recent school shootings in Connecticut. But he says he is "hypersensitive" to the safety of children, due to his own background (on his Facebook page, he says he was abused as a child.) "For anybody to do that kind of stuff (shooting) to kids just tears me to the bone," he said.hypersensitive to safety and behaving like a raving nut in front of them don't seem to compute. Nothing that he 'thought' he saw came close to unsafe.

When he emailed school officials that he had "spilled blood before" and would do so again to defend freedom, McGroarty said, he was not threatening violence; he was speaking as a military veteran who had sworn to protect the U.S. and defend its Constitution. Veterans, he said, will understand that.
in the present climate, what sober-thinking adult writes, 'I've spilled blood before' and expects school and police officials to react with understanding? Really?

[Barfly]

You should link your sources, preferably his actual statement from facebook, not an internet news article summary. Are you just copying some anonymously posted Progressive viewpoint from democraticunderground or freakoutnation? Other than that, I don't agree with any of your interpretation.

[callmeslick]

I'm quoting from the news update in the same local newspaper I linked to in the first article. I never use ridiculous, ax-to-grind ideological sources, except when the point is intended to be humorous.
So, you cannot accept the truth, or that would seem to be the conclusion someone would draw from your post above. Or, do you think this guy was spot on?
In my view, if he saw an issue, he could have:
1. Quietly raised his concern to a school official.
....but, he didn't. He went nutzo in front of a bunch of kindergarten kids, including foul language and admonishing them to ask their parents about Nazis. Wanna bet most of those little kids went home and started the discussion with the sentence, " Jimmy McGroarty's dad was acting real weird at school....."?

2. Sent a thoughtful email explaining his concerns to the District.
....but, he didn't. He chose, even more stupidly, to write an email mentioning his willingness to 'shed blood'. At this moment? Seriously, Barfly, you don't see
anything wrong or alarmning in that wording?

3. Asked other parents if they had noticed what he 'thought' he noticed.
...but, he didn't. Again. Instead, he chose to send parents a copy of the goofy 'shed blood' rant.

what part of my analysis don't you agree with, barfly?

[Barfly]

You should link your sources, preferably his actual statement from facebook, not an internet news article summary. Are you just copying some anonymously posted Progressive viewpoint from democraticunderground or freakoutnation? Other than that, I don't agree with any of your interpretation.