From the comments posted on an Arizona newspaper’s Web site after President Obama’s visit to the city, it’s as if the unfavorable reactions from a high school AP class were a referendum, a resounding thud, on the slate of programs from the new administration. That is hardly the case.
One commenter wrote of the students’ reaction, “There is hope, real hope, after all!” Later someone said, “Glad to know that there are high school students that don’t follow the crowd and stand on their beliefs.” Or take my favorite, “Leave it to the children to state the obvious … ‘the Emperor has no clothes.’ “
Sure, the students dissented with how Obama should implement a bailout for this private sector or for that “too large to fail” business. But no one quoted in the article ever questioned the rationale for the bailouts in the first place, only the fine print. A high school senior who described himself as a “moderate conservative” said, “Overall I think it’s a good idea, but he’s not addressing the issues of the economic crisis.” Rather, the student supports “bailing out businesses” and “providing better regulatory systems for giving out money to businesses.”
The reporter describes one student’s shirt with the Obama’s likeness below the line, “Hitler gave great speeches, too.” Even this student implicitly accepts a central planning agenda but just thinks the plans are “too big and too broad.” Another student who “leans Republican” likes what she is hearing, “but it’s easier said than done.”
Of the four students quoted in the article, not a single student opposed the the basis for the economic intervention. Yet, I still think it’s positive anyone in public (government) education is brazen enough to voice their antagonism in the wake of presidential power.
I don’t expect anyone in their paradigm to question the basis of the government’s intervention. After all, these students themselves are direct recipients of what they perceive is a “free,” even if compulsory, government service. They do not have to bear the burden of financing that service. I can only hope they continue their treachery further and fully understand the dreadful inevitability of central, coercive planning.