Today’s POV blog

In a story posted at CNN.com, conservative parents are convinced that today’s back-to-school speech to be given by President Obama will be an attempt at spreading the partisan political word to school children.

With both sides upset, school administrators are left to make a tough call: whether or not to broadcast the President’s message. Many schools are leaving the decision to the individual teacher. Whether or not a teacher carries the message to the classroom, there’s little doubt that parents on both sides are likely to continue to be upset.

With all the hoopla, the White House yesterday posted the script on their web site  (read it here), which they assure all Americans is simply encouragement to stay in school and maintain focus.

According to FOXNews.com, this signals “again the stark divisions in the country both over politics and social issues.”

Several conservative organizations and pundits have accused the President of trying to indoctrinate impressionable youth with a socialist agenda. The White House denies the allegations.

The question for all of us: Where should our children learn about politics?

At a site such as Today’s POV, one can imagine the great importance of free speech. In the midst of our launch it seems as though our rights to free speech are perhaps more threatened than ever.

In spring 2009, the US Senate proposed a bill that would allow the White House to disconnect private-sector computers from the internet. Does that really mean that your and my computer would be disconnected in the event the president declares a cyber-security emergency? Yes.

Recently, CNET News obtained a copy of the draft bill. This document contains a revised, but very vague iteration of the initial draft.

In the CNET article, Larry Clinton, president of the Internet Security Alliance, is quoted saying, “I think the redraft, while improved, remains troubling due to its vagueness. It is unclear what authority Sen. Rockefeller thinks is necessary over the private sector. Unless this is clarified, we cannot properly analyze, let alone support the bill.”

The Internet Security Alliance has representatives of Verizon, Verisign, Nortel, and Carnegie Mellon University on its board — concern from such industry heavyweights should certainly raise caution amongst us, if not clear alarm.

On 5 August 2009, FOXNews.com reported on the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine running an ad campaign that compared what President Obama’s daughters eat at their private school to the lunches available at public schools.

The little girl featured in the ad is Jasmine Messiah, an 8-year-old vegetarian from a Florida public school. In addition to appearing in the ad, she wrote to Sasha and Malia Obama seeking their support in improved school menus.

In response, White House lawyers are said to have contacted the non-profit group’s president, Dr. Neal Barnard, seeking removal because the ad mentioned the names of the President’s daughters. Dr. Barnard reports that there was an implication made that legal action would be pursued.

On 28 August 2009, Computerworld magazine reported that a different physicians’ group and a social-policy think tank, are up for some legal action of their own as they sue for privacy and free-speech violations over a White House attempt to get people to email them with reports of health-care reform information they deem “fishy.”

The lawsuit, filed by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) and the Coalition for Urban Renewal and Education (CARE), is basically a cease and desist but goes one step further when it demands that collected information be destroyed.

The two organizations claim the White House has illegally used its power to collect information on political speech.

While the legal wrangling goes back and forth, those of us who value free speech should sit up and pay attention. Free vote follows closely on the heels of free speech.