While the mainstream media mock as overblown and unjustified the concerns of many conservatives that President Obama's televised speech to the nation's schoolchildren would be accompanied by liberal politicking, one online news outlet is noting how the president took the chance to push his agenda to a small group of Northern Virginia students prior to the actual speech.
"Prior to his nationally broadcast speech to students on Tuesday, President Barack Obama made a pitch for health care reform in a discussion with 40 freshmen at Wakefield High School in Arlington, Va.," reports Penny Starr of CNSNews.com, a sister organization* to NewsBusters.org.:
Although the president avoided controversial topics in his speech, he did promote health care reform in a face-to-face discussion at Wakefield High School. Asked by a student how he stays motivated to do his job, Obama replied that his staff gives him 10 letters every day from “ordinary folks.”
“Some of the stories are really depressing,” Obama told the 40 freshman, who were chosen to meet with the president during freshman orientation, according to school officials.
“You hear about people who are sick but don't have health care, and suddenly they get a bill for $100,000, and there's no way they can pay for it, and they're about to lose their house. And you’re just reminded that the country is full of really good people who sometimes are going through a hard time,” Obama said.
Story Continues Below Ad ↓“They just need a break. They need a little bit of help. Maybe the way things are set up right now isn't always fair for people, and that motivates you, because you say, well, I can't make everything perfect, I can't prevent somebody from getting sick, but maybe I can make sure that they've got insurance so that when they do get sick, they're going to get some help.”
Another student asked the president about health care in Iraq and Afghanistan: “And my question is, currently 36 countries have universal health coverage, including Iraq and Afghanistan, which have it paid for by the United States. Why can't the United States have universal health coverage?”“Well, I think that’s the question I’ve been asking Congress, because I think we need it,” Obama said. “I think we can do it. And I'm going to be making a speech tomorrow night, talking about my plan to make sure that everybody has access to affordable health care.”
For the full story, click here.
*NewsBusters.org and CNSNews.com are owned by the Media Research Center.
—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Sorry? Come again.
September 9, 2009 - 11:53 ET by JWFYou lose your primary residence in a bankruptcy? First I heard of that.
Also, we already have insurance. So do the old. So do the poor. So who in the hell is he talking about?
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
→ I'll help JWF
September 9, 2009 - 12:02 ET by Cool ArrowThe housing downturn precluded them getting their 3rd refinance based on the alleged value of their house.
They found themselves under water on the mortgage and walked away.
It's an inconvenient fact the President failed to point out.
People in many parts of the country did this, regardless of their health.
Van Jones is a Quitter - FS
Yeah, a lot of good people....
September 9, 2009 - 11:54 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonIndeed, a lot of GOOD PEOPLE are going through hard times as a direct result of the democrats, some republicans trashing the Constitution in a wild attempt to sieze control of the nation from WE The People.
Every problem the People face are a direct result of congressional actions over the last 60 years.
http://gjresult.com
you don't have healthcare
September 9, 2009 - 11:54 ET by katainkentand suddenly you have a bill for $100,000. Odd, It sounds like you had healthcare. Sounds more like you didn't have insurance.
I wished there was a student there that would ask him about tort reform and loosening regs regarding cross-state insuring. Or perhaps the mandating of certain coverages regardless of a person's life situation. I know my oldest would have.
___________________________________________
We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. ~Thomas Jefferson
He has no life outside of
September 9, 2009 - 11:59 ET by d1carterHe has no life outside of politics. Everyone around him are props.
Sounds Fishy
September 9, 2009 - 12:00 ET by viluzionIf I don't pay my medical bills somebody will come and take away my house? I don't think that would be legal. I also don't believe 0bama will make my payments if I get sick. He's fear-mongering in an attempt to trick us into swallowing the wrong colored pill.
→ Pre-existing
September 9, 2009 - 12:06 ET by Cool ArrowWonder if I can get Homeowners Insurance in the middle of a hailstorm?
Van Jones is a Quitter - FS
Indoctrinator in Chief
September 9, 2009 - 12:12 ET by QueenMumI don't really mind any POTUS talking to the kids about working hard in school and minding their parents and teachers. HOWEVER, when the POTUS starts using children in this way, he needs to be stopped. It's disgusting on so many levels.
"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out
of other people's money."
—Margaret Thatcher
one big oversight
September 9, 2009 - 12:29 ET by jon_torlinI just thought of something, maybe someone mentioned this elsewhere and if so, apologies, not trying to pull a Biden by plagiarizing.
So this was to all the kids from kindergarten(or grade school, can't remember) to high school, right? Given what little of the text I've seen, what makes him think that everything he's said will be understood by all grade levels? Bad enough he does the communistic style spiel of saying successful is hard and then lists a couple of examples of those who attained one form of success or another. Wasn't anything inspiring about it! And you're telling a kid in 4th or 5th grade not to try for your dreams?
And then he says that thing about working hard to fix up classrooms and get books and computers, just one question: What happened to letting people do their jobs instead of him micromanaging everything? (It's in his nature, he can't help himself)
Ugh.
-Jon
If children couldn't
September 9, 2009 - 12:44 ET by SeeClearlyIf children couldn't understand it, then I suppose it would be up to their parents, teachers, or whatever to explain the finer points.
As for you relating success being difficult to communism, the American dream I aspire to is one where any single person can be a success as long as they have the gumption and balls-to-the-wall ambition to strive for their goals. You can't possibly be insinuating that capitalism promotes laziness?
I'm even getting the feeling you didn't read the article. At no point did he say that a child's dreams are unattainable. He repeatedly stated that no matter the roadblock, if you put in the extra mile victory will be yours. Hence his discussion about children maybe needing to do more drafts of their essays, or go over their math problems repeatedly to grasp the concepts. Those are concrete examples of a child stepping up to the plate to adapt, overcome, and succeed: the cornerstones of capitalism!
Finally I'm not sure how him mentioning that classrooms will be cleaned up equates to him micromanaging. If on the other hand you had evidence of him breathing down principals' necks: that would be evidence of him micromanaging. Simply stating a goal of his government is in no way a lack of delegation and confidence in the hardworking people of this country.
Sincerely,
See Clearly
what's the point?
September 9, 2009 - 13:36 ET by jon_torlinAs you say, if children couldn't understand it, I then have to say "why do it in the first place?"
And no, I never said capitalism promotes laziness, I was referring to how it seems many democrats want to hold back personal achievement, make everyone the same. I say seems because not all of them are like that.
And for the micromanaging, I don't care for his style of speech because it shows that he's the one doing things rather than delegating as a real leader would, even saying as such. For example, he should have said it was the department of education working to fix up classrooms, etc. That was my take on it.
-Jon
the "I" drinking game
September 9, 2009 - 13:42 ET by katainkentfor parents only, of course
Listen to the Obama speech he made to your children. Everytime he says "I" you must take a drink. Guarantee you'll need to be scraped off the floor by the closing remarks.
___________________________________________
We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. ~Thomas Jefferson
He did it to get his
September 9, 2009 - 13:52 ET by SeeClearlyHe did it to get his message out. And my "if" about the children should only apply to the very youngest. Yes, I could understand if kindergartners didn't watch it, but it's not like it hurt them. If their families disagree with Obama then I'm sure they've heard it a number of times.
I'm glad we're on the same page as far as the necessities of capitalism. Hard-work, ambition, creativity: they're super important. I'm also glad you said seems, because a lot my friends are Dems, successful, and happy to remain that way.
As for his style of speaking, I suppose it's a matter of personal preference. I'm by no means in awe of his skills, at least nowhere near to the extent some are. He's decent, but I preferred McCain's speaking style. I just think it might get kind of wordy if he always specified the department that would carry out policies.
Sincerely,
See Clearly
After this, can/will it
September 9, 2009 - 12:24 ET by dvdaughtryAfter this, can/will it still be a mystery why conservatives didn't trust the man?
You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?
So what? He expressed his
September 9, 2009 - 12:28 ET by SeeClearlySo what? He expressed his opinion to a group of people. Whether its good or bad its a policy that he feels strongly about and that he's trying to garner understanding and support for, why should he hold back? Proponents of dissenting opinions may then feel free to voice their opinions: that's how individuals and groups who disagree on a point of interest go about disseminating their arguments.
Also could somebody explain their concerns about tort reform?
Sincerely,
See Clearly
I tort I tore a scaredy cat
September 9, 2009 - 12:36 ET by Jack BauerYou first.
Explain why you think there's no need to reform the laws regarding the ability of parasite ambulance chasing lawyers to ensure malpractise insurance premiums have reached crippling levels?
Thus adding massively to healthcare costs.
Sorry, I suppose I phrased
September 9, 2009 - 12:47 ET by SeeClearlySorry, I suppose I phrased the question poorly. I don't know much about the problems inherent to tort law. I was just asking why people would think it needs reforming. I wasn't defending the current institution.
Sincerely,
See Clearly
→ Litigation Lottery
September 9, 2009 - 12:54 ET by Cool ArrowA tremendous part of a Doctor's overhead is malpractice insurance.
Juries are notoriously punitive towards doctors.
Van Jones is a Quitter - FS
I don't know much about
September 9, 2009 - 13:06 ET by Jack BauerNobody normal does. That's the problem. But most people know about ambulance chasing parasites like John Edwards who take large percentages of damages as they channel dead aborted babies in court testimony.
So you don't have to be a genius to figure that if a doctor has to personally shell out $300,000 a year in malpractise insurance, then the money has to come from somewhere.
You know what people need? Government run Legal Firms. A public option to offer more choice and competition.
Oh hang on -- that's already in place.
The jails are full of folks represented by government defenders.
big impact
September 9, 2009 - 12:36 ET by jon_torlinBeing a leader of a free country (how long that lasts remains to be seen) has a huge impact and this is where you have to be careful about what words you use and how you talk to people, it's a huge responsibility which demands the respect to the office.
Sadly, ever since he's been voted in, he's shown a serious lack of respect to that office, even outside of the White House (coming out of Air Force 1 in a polo shirt versus a suit greeting dignitaries of that country like Egypt who are dressed in full suits greeting a visiting world leader).
Tort reform? I'll give you an easy example: that lady who spilled coffee on herself due to being clumsy(as in not being careful, it's a cup of HOT coffee! and suing McDonalds(or whoever it was) for damages and winning. That case should have been tossed out, but instead it paved the way for more litigations that have gotten way out of control and people can sue for anything. A former VP candidate did a few of those himself.
-Jon
Yes, that's a good point.
September 9, 2009 - 12:53 ET by SeeClearlyYes, that's a good point. The kind of legal institution that allows such a ridiculous case to go through certainly does merit changes.
The big problem as I see it (though again I'm not fully up to par on this one), is that sometimes companies are in the wrong, and whatever changes do, and should, occur, need to uphold the right for people to achieve just compensation.
Sincerely,
See Clearly
Why should he hold back?
September 9, 2009 - 12:41 ET by SickofLibsBecause 14-yr olds don't vote?
No, but they are citizens
September 9, 2009 - 12:57 ET by SeeClearlyNo, but they are citizens of this country. They deserve respect and as such are as entitled to a point of view as anybody.
Sincerely,
See Clearly
~But only
September 9, 2009 - 13:00 ET by choselife3xNo, but they are citizens of this country. They deserve respect and as such are as entitled to a point of view as anybody.
If their mothers allow them to be born.
That high-pitched scream you hear is the troll under my 4" spiked heel.
Wow, that was a
September 9, 2009 - 13:03 ET by SeeClearlyWow, that was a gastronomical change of topic... Not sure how you raising this point contributes in any way to this discussion.
Sincerely,
See Clearly
~Your sanctimonious straw man
September 9, 2009 - 13:07 ET by choselife3xWas in desperate need of disembowelment.
That high-pitched scream you hear is the troll under my 4" spiked heel.
*astronomical And by
September 9, 2009 - 13:57 ET by SeeClearly*astronomical
And by pointing out the irrelevance of your statement, I wasn't crediting it with crushing anything I've said. I was just calling it irrelevant. And what's worse (and I apologize if I'm wrong here), I think you just said it to be inflammatory and derail the conversation.
Sincerely,
See Clearly
~Yes
September 9, 2009 - 14:12 ET by choselife3xI'm a troll.
That high-pitched scream you hear is the troll under my 4" spiked heel.
Well I'm glad that's out in
September 9, 2009 - 14:19 ET by SeeClearlyWell I'm glad that's out in the open.
~Out in the open
September 9, 2009 - 14:28 ET by choselife3xI was just pointing out why I feel they are as worthy as any of us to hear an opinion.
Sooooo...hearing Obama's opinion is a matter of personal worth. Fascinating. You want to re-word that inartful statement?
That high-pitched scream you hear is the troll under my 4" spiked heel.
→ Yeah
September 9, 2009 - 14:30 ET by Cool ArrowAnd a 3-yr old will vote himself candy and ice cream every time.
If I were a HS Freshman, I know what I'd be voting for. And I know exactly what consequences I'd write out of the bill, too.
Van Jones is a Quitter - FS
Yeah, the bulls eye called,
September 9, 2009 - 13:15 ET by dvdaughtryYeah, the bulls eye called, he wants his red dots and red rings back.
You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?
Read the thread headline again
September 9, 2009 - 13:05 ET by SickofLibsThis thread is about Obama pushing his healthcare fiasco to teenagers, which is not what he claimed he would do. Rather, he was to speak on the virtues of working hard and staying in school.
I don't know how you get that I implied teenagers don't "deserve respect" because they can't vote.
Right SoL...notice how he
September 9, 2009 - 13:51 ET by JerRight SoL...notice how he pounded them with the necessity for the public option and a government takeover of health care, followed by orders to run home and tell mommy and daddy the evil Republicans were standing in the way of it. [sarc off]
He spoke in general terms, in response to student questions, and frankly said nothing about health care that Congressional Republicans haven't publicly expressed support for. Other than that, his primary emphasis was on the importance of education.
Jer
Now cmon Jer
September 9, 2009 - 15:50 ET by SickofLibsYou and I both know that is the TEACHER'S job, not the POTUS', to get the kiddies to go home and whine about the evil obstructionist Republicans.
However I don't think Obama should been have blowing smoke up the kid's butts by making statements like "And we can afford to do it [healthcare] and it will actually, I think, over time save us money if we set that up." Nobody is buying that, on or off the Hill.
SoL
September 9, 2009 - 16:11 ET by JerBut, I suppose you were fine with the Gipper hyping the virtues of Reaganomics to middle schoolers. Right?
It's the teacher's job, the parent's job, the president's job...I can't think of whose job it's not...to impart positive messages to kids about their education. True, politics and policy should be avoided as best as possible in interactions such as this one. As such, I would rather Obama hadn't commented even generally about health care. But, his statements about it certainly weren't cast in overtly partisan language.
Jer
Jer -
September 9, 2009 - 16:44 ET by SickofLibsI was too young to have an opinion on that Gipper guy./
Well, we appear to agree Obama should have avoided the healthcare issue. Unfortunately, he was set up by precocious Sean the 9th grader, who posed the question in a very un-9th grade-like fashion.
I noticed that too, SickoLibs.
September 9, 2009 - 17:09 ET by JerI noticed that too, SickoLibs. Probably Rahm Emmanuel's kid. All the other questioners were asking things like "Gee, what's it like to be President of the whole wide world"?, and then for the final question you'd think David Gregory had sneaked into the audience.
BTW, my opinion of Reagan continues to become more and more favorable as years go by.
Jer
Jer: The article I linked
September 10, 2009 - 02:22 ET by stratmanJer:
The article I linked to in a reply to in a different thread on this specific subject said it was High School students that Reagan spoke to across the country.
Have you found a source that says differently?
At least Ronnie and George #1 didn't tell kindergarteners if they failed school they failed their country.
No fearmongering here, just spreading hope around to all the little childrens.
strat... I'll take
September 10, 2009 - 02:43 ET by Jerstrat...
I'll take another look. I had found one reference to a speech by Reagan, and one to an address to students by George H. W. Bush. I thought Reagan's was to middle schoolers (which was videotaped and then telecast by C-Span to a number of schools over the ensuing three days).
I could be mistaken about the grade level of his audience, or maybe I confused it with Bush's address. Or maybe Reagan's remarks were to middle schoolers, but then telecast only to high schools. In any event, I'll recheck.
Cheers,
Jer
Here You Go
September 10, 2009 - 20:40 ET by stratmanReagan's speech
Bush's speech
Thanks, strat... I read
September 11, 2009 - 18:51 ET by JerThanks, strat...
I read Reagan's address in its entirety and the excerpts from Bush's remarks. I didn't have any serious problems with either--particularly Bush's--although I think you must concede Reagan's clearly contained some unabashed policy-related chest thumping.
What is your quick take on those speeches in light of the controversy surrounding Obama's educational pep talk?
Jer
Jer: I wrote a response
September 11, 2009 - 22:45 ET by stratmanJer:
I wrote a response which got lost when NB's decided to log me off unknown to me while I composed the post. Aarrrrgh!
Briefly:
Ok. That was not especially brief.
Speaking of "takes", you did not reply to my lengthy analysis of the article you presented several weeks ago concerning medical bankruptcies. Do you still believe the utility and veracity of the 50% figure in light of the evidence presented against it?
Sorry, I hope you don't
September 9, 2009 - 14:00 ET by SeeClearlySorry, I hope you don't think that I said you don't respect the youth. I was just pointing out why I feel they are as worthy as any of us to hear an opinion.
And to agree with Jer, Obama really wasn't be combative, just informative.
Sincerely,
See Clearly
What is the point?
September 9, 2009 - 14:04 ET by FeynmanFanWhat is the point of the President of the United States explaining his position on health care to school kids? They can't vote on it. They can't really take any action at all, other than sit and listen (or not). That being the case, what is the point of Obama taking time out of his schedule to talk to them?
"I support the President but not his policies" - Blonde
practicing for congress?
September 9, 2009 - 14:07 ET by katainkentooooooooh where is it?! ah, here 'tis! *rimshot*
___________________________________________
We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. ~Thomas Jefferson
Because teens aren't
September 9, 2009 - 14:18 ET by SeeClearlyBecause teens aren't stupid. He explained his position to a group of High School freshmen. By that point in their lives they are definitely able to understand what he's saying, consider the information, then make an informed decision. Even though they can't vote, they will some day, and in the meantime they have to decide how they want their country to be run.
Sincerely,
See Clearly
→ Oh Really?
September 9, 2009 - 14:25 ET by Cool ArrowA kid, yet to earn his first paycheck, understands the magnitude of government theft he faces for the rest of his life?
You're right. Someday they'll vote.
And given what we appear to be voting for ourselves, consider how they'll look at that apple core we leave behind.
Van Jones is a Quitter - FS
I've watched the
September 9, 2009 - 14:50 ET by JerI've watched the hand-wringing and listened to the wailing over the alleged mass indoctrination of our kids by the liberals in our schools and media for the past fifty years. Somehow, far more Republicans have been elected president than Democrats. I guess the indoctrination hasn't worked.
Jer
→ Kidding, Right?
September 9, 2009 - 14:57 ET by Cool ArrowJer, I know you're a lawyer, and all that, but you honestly can't see that even the Republican party has moved markedly left over the years?
It's gotten so bad that John Frikkin McCain was our last candidate, and you honestly believe we're not drifting left?
Jer, I know you're a lawyer, and this ain't no courtroom, but could you please let us know when you're making a laughable assertion?
Some of us may think you're serious.
Van Jones is a Quitter - FS
Cool Arrow...
September 9, 2009 - 15:11 ET by JerIt's only because I have read just about every comment you've posted over the past two years, and therefore know you perhaps even better than you know yourself, that I realize you are being serious.
The center of gravity for the Republican party has been shifting rightward for several decades now. George W. Bush would never have been the nominee in 2000 if he had not become more "conservative" than his dad. He tacked back toward the center in some respects after he was elected. But the GOP has been Ronald Reagan's and more recently Rush Limbaugh's party for years--not Eisenhower's, Nixon's, or Ford's.
Jer
→ Jer
September 9, 2009 - 15:17 ET by Cool ArrowSCHIP and TARP are Reagan/Limbaugh Republican actions?
Aside from how Republicans treat National Defense differently from Democrats, I'm with Ross Perot on this one.
Not a dime's worth of difference between them.
Van Jones is a Quitter - FS
the country is still center right
September 9, 2009 - 15:04 ET by katainkentAnd not all children are in public school. About 12 percent of the children in this country are in private school. Homeschool - although it is a minor percent (2.1) it has nearly doubled since the late 90's.
And then there are conservative parents like myself who neither wail, nor whine, but counter the material they find contrary to their beliefs, at home. I would be curious what were to happen if all parents simply abdicated raising their children altogether and left it to the public schools. Hopefully, I will never see such a thing happen.
___________________________________________
We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. ~Thomas Jefferson
~Five words, Jer
September 9, 2009 - 15:07 ET by choselife3xWe Are All Socialists Now
That high-pitched scream you hear is the troll under my 4" spiked heel.
No! They got you, too,
September 9, 2009 - 15:33 ET by JerNo! They got you, too, huh? Succumbed to the invasion of the body and soul snatchers.
Even Republicans sometimes must bow to the will of the people--and on other occasions intervene [see Bush, George W.] to prevent the collapse of our predominantly capitalist economy (or at least significant sectors of it). Or, they could stand completely on principle and campaign with promises to abolish Social Security, Medicare, the Department of Education, government-operated hospitals (the ones where our Congressmen--Democrats and Republicans are cared for), etc. And then they could have the 142 votes they received individually mounted and framed and displayed in their dens.
Jer
142 votes
September 9, 2009 - 15:37 ET by katainkenthow is it that we were granted the ability to vote ourselves entitlements in the first place?
Now it seems, the country is addicted to it.
___________________________________________
We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. ~Thomas Jefferson
You have the ability to
September 9, 2009 - 15:53 ET by JerYou have the ability to vote for anything on the ballot, and your congressmen have the ability to pass any legislation they wish, and the President can sign into law anything to which he is so inclined, and the Supreme Court can declare it unconstitutional if they so decide.
Jer
→ Jer
September 9, 2009 - 16:00 ET by Cool ArrowCan I appoint you "Guardian ad litem" to represent the great-great-grandchildren I don't have yet?
I doubt I'll understand the legaleze in Chinese.
Might want to bill me for "Rosetta Stone" while you're at it.
Van Jones is a Quitter - FS
it was..
September 9, 2009 - 16:01 ET by katainkentmore a philosophical question but thanks Jer.
___________________________________________
We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. ~Thomas Jefferson
~A few thoughts
September 9, 2009 - 15:53 ET by choselife3xA government which robs Peter to pay Paul, can always count on the support of Paul. – George Bernard Shaw
One of the greatest delusions in the world is the hope that the evils in this world are to be cured by legislation. – Thomas B. Reed (1886)
No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session. – Mark Twain (1866)
A wise and frugal government which shall restrain men from injuring one
another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own
pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth
of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government. –
Thomas Jefferson (1801)
There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does
not want merely because you think it would be good for him. – Robert Heinlein
The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under
the name of liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist
program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever
knowing how it happened.
-
Norman Thomas, U.S. Socialist Party Candidate 1940, 1944, 1948
That high-pitched scream you hear is the troll under my 4" spiked heel.
~50 years of liberal indoctrination
September 9, 2009 - 15:22 ET by choselife3xBureau of Justice crime statistics over the last 50 years.
That high-pitched scream you hear is the troll under my 4" spiked heel.
Interesting that the
September 9, 2009 - 15:43 ET by JerInteresting that the violent crime rate peaked under Reagan/Bush and began declining under Clinton/Gore.
Jer
~Jer
September 9, 2009 - 16:02 ET by choselife3xI blame MTV. *thumps Bible for emphasis and adjusts head covering*
That high-pitched scream you hear is the troll under my 4" spiked heel.
→ cl3x
September 9, 2009 - 16:08 ET by Cool ArrowHe knows the answer to that one.
The average American was younger under Reagan/Bush than under Clinton/Gore.
Van Jones is a Quitter - FS
~Teenager's informed decision-making
September 9, 2009 - 14:40 ET by choselife3xThirty-four percent of young women become pregnant at least once before
they reach the age of 20 -- about 820,000 a year. Eight in ten of these
teen pregnancies are unintended and 79 percent are to unmarried teens.
Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reports that 19 million new STD
infections occur every year. And, even more alarming, is that nearly 50
percent of these new cases happen to young people between the ages of
15 and 24. Not only that, but the American Social Health Association
(ASHA) reports that half of all new HIV infections occur in teenagers.
In 2005, about 10.8
million persons ages 12-20 (28.2% of this age group) reported drinking
alcohol in the past month. Nearly 7.2 million (18.8%) were binge
drinkers, and 2.3 million (6.0%) were heavy drinkers.
crashes remain the number one cause of death among youth ages 15-20.
There were 7,460 youth motor vehicle deaths in 2005. (This includes
both drivers and passengers.)
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
percent (28%) of 15- to 20-year-old drivers who were killed in motor
vehicle crashes in 2005 had been drinking.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Yeah, they're obviously putting a lot of thought into deciding how they want the country run.
That high-pitched scream you hear is the troll under my 4" spiked heel.
chose...teenage issues
September 9, 2009 - 15:00 ET by JerAll the more reason for Obama to urge students to stay in school, study hard, be responsible, and to pull the lever for a Democrat as many times as they can get away with as soon as they're old enough to vote. [Okay, I got a bit carried away with that last part.]
Jer
→ Not really
September 9, 2009 - 15:05 ET by Cool ArrowIf I honestly believed I could vote myself an existence totally devoid of negative consequences, I would.
I'm not so foolish as to believe that. But I wonder how many grownups believe it.
Van Jones is a Quitter - FS
His "opinion" is always so simplistic and childish
September 9, 2009 - 13:12 ET by StarAZYes, boys and girls, some people are having a hard time. Maybe if you get sick, your parents won't be able to afford a hospital for you. What will they do? Blah-blah. I am so sick of this nonsense. Talk about lies"! How do these plans go from job to job or no job. With no job, who pays? Even with a job, who pays--what is affordable to these people, $500 a mo!? They want to fine people--they must figure they have money for a fine. Have these admin people ever laid eyes on an EOB. Have they considered trying to use their new exec powers they assumed over industry to roll back health costs to something close to actual cost? I can't even watch the dog and pony tonite.
Well for starters, I hope
September 9, 2009 - 14:05 ET by SeeClearlyWell for starters, I hope you aren't criticizing a speech directed at children as being childish. That just wouldn't make sense.
And yes, some people have very low income, and may be unable to afford 500$ a month. That's the point.
Sincerely,
See Clearly
→ SeeClearly
September 9, 2009 - 16:22 ET by Cool ArrowI wish you really could see clearly.
Average State and Federal funding/ student in Public School?
And you're saying $500/month is too expensive? Now what were you saying about "we can't afford it"?
Truth is, Public school systems are bastions of government bloat.
Want to go 2 for 2 with that Health Care idea?
Van Jones is a Quitter - FS
$500/month? How am I supposed to pay the lease on my Escalade?
September 9, 2009 - 16:49 ET by SickofLibs$500/month? How am I supposed to pay the lease on my Escalade?
I get it
September 9, 2009 - 17:28 ET by StarAZThe Welfare Queen thing. Yeah, there might be a few. It won't be the majority or close to it. Giving up my daughter's health insurance was a big decision. No Escalade. Actually, no car.
→ StarAZ
September 9, 2009 - 17:39 ET by Cool ArrowAllow me to clarify my point.
A better education for ALL students can be realized at a fraction of the current cost of public education.
But it won't happen because public schools are more about government dependency than they are about education.
Van Jones is a Quitter - FS
Two subjs
September 10, 2009 - 10:41 ET by StarAZSorry--I was on the cost of whatever godforsaken health policies we will have to buy and you were on cost of edu per student. I agree they could do better on schools--the states, someone. My kid is not really educated in my opinion. She hated school, would not go to college. Some of this is on her, obviously, but some on the schools, too. Or am I missing your point again. If so--I apologize. Yes, there is a parallel--creating dependency on govt runs thru health and edu.
Yes, See Clearly
September 9, 2009 - 17:25 ET by StarAZYou do know people will have to BUY insurance or substantiate a need for a subsidy, don't you? What is "affordable" to these WH people? Five hundred a month? I bet they think anyone has THAT lying around. That was my point--most people won't be able afford insurance--my 28-yr-old sure can't. You've reinforced my point. Thanks.
And yes, See Clearly
September 9, 2009 - 17:26 ET by StarAZI DO criticze a speech for children as being childish and condescending, though in all fairness, this president talks down to everyone.