A talk to kids is fine. Obama reads a mean speech, so it will seem inspiring to some.
Encouraging them to pledge to support the president and giving curricula to the schools to that end is something else. Apparently, some of this has been rescinded given the outcry against the demogogery and arrogance of the original plan. (Emphasis added.)
Just so we're on the same page on the definition of delirium, here's the Merriam Webster's definition: "an acute mental disturbance characterized by confused thinking and disrupted attention usually accompanied by disordered speech and hallucinations." All characteristics of delirium are present in Groothuis's take on Obama speech, particularly the hallucinations about anything being "rescinded given the outcry against the demogogery [sic] and arrogance of the original plan." What original plan, may I ask?
People like Groothuis, and their tactics, are so pathetic that anyone with an ounce of brain matter can see through them a mile ahead. And gifted people, like Ed Brayton, can write oh-so presciently:
Prediction: The right wing loonies who threw a hissy fit over this will respond in one of two ways.
A. Continue to rant like nutballs. Or,
B. Claim a victory because they forced Obama to change his speech and take out all the political indoctrination they hallucinated would be in there in the first place.
I will make the Curmudgeon an offer: I will stop calling him an intellectual fraud if he posts on his ridiculous blog a White House statement or press-release (not a meretricious Fox News fantasy bulletin, or the fevered fantasies of people like Titus, Groothuis or anyone like them) of the speech that the president intended to have given, before the outcry, complete with highlights of the revisions?
A true Curmudgeon should love a challenge.