Did you ever thnk it would come as far as this as fast as this?

I have reported often in the last month or so about the precipitous drop in Obama’s approval rating among Independent and Likely voters. Well precipitous as far as Obama is concerned but so gratifying to me.

But there was worse to come because now the cheerleaders on the Left are donning their life vests and sleeping with their shoes on, just in case.

Going back a few years, David Brooks of the New York Times wrote of his interview with the newly-seated senator from Illinois. He commented on the “beautifully creased trousers atop the immaculately polished shoes”. “At that moment” he continued, “I knew he would become President”. Now though, in a second article, he comments on the slide in approval and wonders if. “Obama is up to the job”.

Then, in the Washington Post on August 31, Howard Kurtz joined the growing band of liberal media allies who have gone “wobbly on him”. As Kurtz put it, “If Obama is losing Paul Krugman, can the rest of the Left be far behind?”

And similar sentiments have been voiced by such luminaries as Clarence Page of the Chicago Tribune, Frank Rich of the New York Times, Arianna Huffington, and Richard Cohen of the Washington Post.

So even Obama’s ego can see the writing on the wall and it is obvious that a new strategy has to come. One tactic is to address a joint session of Congress next week but for a warm-up the Great Leader proposes to make a speech to the school children of the nation.

This has parents and some school boards up in arms.

“No President gets to speak to my children unchallenged”, is one of the milder rebukes that have been recorded as parents across the country are rebelling against plans by President Barack Obama to speak directly to their children through the classrooms of the nation's public schools without their presence, participation and approval.

The plans announced by Obama also have been cited as raising the specter of the Civilian National Security Force, to which he's referred several times since his election campaign began, but never fully explained. "He's recruiting his civilian army. His 'Hitler' youth brigade," wrote one participant in a forum at Free Republic.

"I am not going to compare Obama to Hitler. We'll leave that to others and you can form your own opinions about them and their analogies. ... However, we can learn a lot from the spread of propaganda in Europe that led to Hitler's power. A key ingredient in that spread of propaganda was through the youth," wrote a blogger at the AmericanElephant.com blog, where the subject of the day was a national "Keep-Your-Child-at-Home-Day." At issue was an announcement that Obama plans to deliver a message directly to students via the Internet into public school classrooms across the nation on Sept. 8.

The announcement said the federal Department of Education "is encouraging educators, students and parents to use this opportunity to help students get focused and begin the school year strong."

The government also is publicizing a list of suggestions for students and teachers to do in preparation for the speech, including studying Barack Obama's writings and presidency.

But opposition is assembling quickly, similar to the concerns expressed on the AmericanElephant blog: "Now the former community organizer and current president of the United States is making an unprecedented speech to the school children of our nation. I'd like to believe his motives were pure and politics didn't play into this. But viewing this administration's track record doesn’t afford such benefit of the doubt.

"When the president browbeats property owners who want to protect their legal rights .... when the president admits he doesn't know the facts but impugns the integrity of a police force… when the president calls me a liar for reporting what is actually in the health care bills and encourages my neighbors to report me to some enemies list… when the president apologizes to nations around the world and bows to a Saudi king… he loses the benefit of the doubt," the blogger wrote.

"Without benefit of the doubt, the president doesn't get to speak to my children unchallenged," the writer said.

The education department's suggestions include building background knowledge for students about Obama, and then asking, "What do you think he'll say to you?"
During the speech, students should be instructed to "think about the following: What is the president trying to tell me? What is the president asking me to do?"
Another exercise would be to have students write letters to themselves about "what they can do to help the president." "These would be collected and redistributed at an appropriate later date by the teacher to make students accountable to their goals," the recommendations suggest.

At the Docstoc website where the announcement about the speech was drawing negative reaction, one forum participant confirmed that his grandchildren would not be in school that day. "What's he going to do, tell the kids to report their parents to the Thought Police if they don't support Obamacare?" added another.
"I don't care what the heck he's going to talk about, unless he holds a teaching degree for every state, and he plans on actually TEACHING a lesson, this SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED!!!" added another.

"Let the brain-washing begin. Yes, it is a bit of a stretch. But I remember from history class that some other very prominent figures in history started out like this, all about education and change for the better. Capture the hearts and minds and all that. You can call it what you will but Obama Youth or Hitler Youth … This is much too slippery a slope, this day and age with the role of government becoming more invasive the last thing I want is for 'them' to get a tooth into my kids," wrote a contributor.

On columnist Michelle Malkin's forum page, one person wrote simply, "The Obama Youth Corps has to start somewhere."

On the DailyPaul website publicizing U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, another parent wrote, "Perhaps it’s harmless, but Obama's past behavior and his push for 'service' and community over individuals make me very uncomfortable… "My kids will be forced to listen to the views of a president that is perhaps the most anti-American in history, not to mention one who believes we need a 'civilian national security force just as strong, powerful and well-funded as our military.'"

WorldNet Daily has reported on Obama's civilian force plans several times, including when he signed into law the "Give Act," H.R. 1388, which massively expanded the National Service Corporation and allocated to it billions of dollars.

Obama had told a campaign stop in Colorado Springs last year he wants a "Civilian National Security Force" as big and as well-funded as the U.S. military.
As the presidential campaign advanced last year, another video appeared that for many crystallized their concerns over such a "corps." It shows a squad of young men marching and shouting praises to Obama.

Joseph Farah, founder and editor of WND, used his daily column first to raise the issue of a "national civilian force" and then to elevate it with a call to all reporters to start asking questions. "If we're going to create some kind of national police force as big, powerful and well-funded as our combined U.S. military forces, isn't this rather a big deal?" Farah wrote. "I thought Democrats generally believed the U.S. spent too much on the military. How is it possible their candidate is seeking to create some kind of massive but secret national police force that will be even bigger than the Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force put together? "Is Obama serious about creating some kind of domestic security force bigger and more expensive than that? If not, why did he say it? What did he mean?" Farah wrote.

Duane Lester, writing at All American Blogger, has verbalized opponents' worst fears. "Hitler knew that if you control the youth, you control the future. I wrote about him in 'The Threats to Home Schooling: From Hitler to the NEA.' As I noted in that article, Hitler said: 'The Youth of today is ever the people of tomorrow. For this reason we have set before ourselves the task of inoculating our youth with the spirit of this community of the people at a very early age, at an age when human beings are still unperverted and therefore unspoiled,'" he wrote.

Here in Arizona, the State Superintendent of Schools has already voiced his concern about the proposal to the various school districts but has decided that the final decision on showing the broadcast should be left to those districts.

Well, he was almost right. The decision should be left to the parents for they are the ones who are ultimately responsible for their children. Or has the Government taken over that duty as well?