Dear Editor:

I received my copy of The Fairfield Recorder dated Sept. 3 this morning. While reading your account of the Town Hall Meeting with Cong. Joe Barton in Wortham on Aug. 27 (I'm not sure what "SRO" means) I noted a couple of things I don't remember while I was in attendance. I would like to express the way I heard it.

When Mexia resident Bennie Green expressed her concern about the "Czars" appointed by President Barack Obama I don't recall Cong. Barton saying that the title "Czar" was something that Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck had given them. I do remember, however, Barack Obama named them "Czars" when he appointed the first of his 34 (at present) "Czars." I also recall that Ms. Green specially addressed the appointment of Van Jones, the "Green Czar," who is an avowed Communist, by Obama.

It appeared to me there was more concern among those attending the Town Hall meeting with the takeover of everything by the Obama Administration. A government takeover of health care, or the desire of, is the straw that broke the camel's back.

Jim Gazzaway Fairfield

(EDITOR'S NOTE: SRO is an abbreviation, used commonly in reviews of concerts or events, meaning "standing room only."

* * * * * Dear Editor:

I am writing this letter concerning President Obama's back-to-school speech to school children. I cannot believe that FISD didn't show it to students "live" on Tuesday. Instead, teachers have the opportunity to critique it first and show it in their classrooms— -or not—-and parents who do not want their children to view it may have them "opt out" of viewing the speech.

This is ridiculous because the speech was not about politics. President Obama used his background as an example of how you can get an education and be a success, even if you are reared by a single mom who doesn't have much money. A lot of kids need this encouragement. This was the President of the United States trying to motivate students to stay in school and get an education. Why would anyone be against this?

As a retired teacher, I sat through some really dumb assembly programs that didn't have this importance. Best I can remember, no one got to "opt out" years ago when an old couple from the Philippines did a folk dance/Vaudeville act at our school—-or Dave Davlin's basketball—-or Bob White's magic show. If FISD could hold assemblies for these, the President of the United States deserved an assembly for his motivational speech.

I would have taken only 20 minutes to show President Obama the respect he deserves. When I taught fourth grade, I taught students to respect the office of President, no matter how their parents voted. It is really a shame that the first African-American President of the U.S. is shown this lack of respect, and it reeks of political and racial bias from FISD.

An article in the Dallas Morning News used the term "rabid opposition" to President Obama's motivational speech. This opposition campaigned a lot on family values. What I am sensing is outright hatred for our President, and I don't think that hatred is supposed to be one of those family values.

Barbara Price Fairfield

* * * * * Dear Editor:

How sad it is for the school children of this county . . . Sad, because they live in an environment that fosters such closed minded attitudes that some parents would deny their child the opportunity to hear an uplifting speech of encouragement to stay in school and study hard from President Obama.

How sad, that they would be taught such disrespect and loathing for the President of the United States, no matter who he is or what their political point of view might be.

The speech he gave was not political and did not promote any ideology that would be harmful to anybody, especially a child. Other Presidents throughout the past several administrations, Republicans and Democrats, have given similar speeches to the school children of this country.

Why was this event so different and why did it cause such a reaction? . . . It's no wonder that some of today's children show little or no respect for themselves, other people, their property and even for their own family members.

I am at a loss to understand this and I fear the answers to my questions, are too ugly to print in your paper.

Joy Shaw Fairfield

* * * * * Dear Editor:

I must say I was not surprised when I received the permission slip from Fairfield elementary school asking my permission for my third grader to view and complete assignments on President Obama's speech. I was relieved that I was at least given the choice to decline, which I did, as some school districts in the state and the nation required the viewing

I, myself, read the speech and thought it was very well written and encouraging. I can see myself using some of the same verbiage when talking to my own children. But I think the President should have addressed his speech to parents. As parents it is our job to encourage our children to go to school. Well, I actually make my children go to school and they don't even know that you can quit!

The Department of Education should be promoting reading, writing, math, science, history and the arts. Leave the social and moral issues to the parents, grandparents, clergy, friends, or whoever is in your family circle. Children at any age should be made aware of current events that are age appropriate, but opinions should come from parents, not school curriculum.

As taxpayers we allow our government to use our money to pay for schools and education. I expect my child to learn the basics of education. We, as parents, should be teaching our children how to succeed, we should be telling them stories of our past and stories of their grandparents' past.

As a parent, I take my responsibility seriously. I check my son's homework every night, I listen to him read (sometimes trying to stay awake), I make sure he goes to bed at an appropriate time every night, I make sure that he has breakfast every morning, and guess what, I didn't need the government to tell me to do that.

My oldest son graduated from Fairfield High School in 2004, my daughter graduated in the top 10 percent of her class in 2009 and attends UTA, and my youngest son has been an "A" honor student every year for his three short years in school. They know what I expect from them, and that encourages them to do their best, better than any speech given by anyone!

Our President should have given his speech in primetime where parents and children could watch it together and have a family discussion about it. FISD please teach my child about our founding fathers, how to do math, understanding science and let them have fun at recess. I will take care of the "raising" part.

Parents, please don't expect your child's teacher to raise them and teach them manners. I know may of the FISD teachers and they are dedicated to your child's education, but give them a break. They have their own families to raise.

I know many parents that raise their children with the same philosophy as I do. I don't know if they are Democrats, Republicans or Independents—-I do know that they agree our children are our most precious commodities and are our future and we love them beyond what words can describe. We all got the permission slip and, as parents, we choose. I chose not to allow my son to try to complete an assignment to tell the President of the United States of America how he could help him. I do not think my son should get a pass on missing an assignment, so I may have him write the President a letter asking him to help all American children by not spending their future away, or I may have him write a prayer for our country because, as Christians, we take our problems to a higher authority. But, I would never expect FISD to assign that to school children.

Stick to the basics and keep politics out of the school curriculum. God bless our troops and God bless America.

Sincerely, Christi Eidson Butler

* * * * * Dear Editor:

Your article regarding Freestone County students not being allowed to see President Obama's speech to students is both misleading and troublesome. I am afraid that your partisan slip is showing!

During this time of deeply divided public feelings on political questions, the decision of the schools to preview and allow parents to make decisions concerning their children was both prudent and practical. I would hope the schools would continue this policy regardless of who wants to address our school children in a captive setting.

Most households have the ability to record the speech, allow the parents to preview for content and prepare their children if they deem the subject matter appropriate. Why should our schools take away that ability? I recorded and watched the speech. It was very good and offered a timely message for students. There was no way for me to know that before the speech was delivered, however.

If it is The Fairfield Recorder's position that our schools should serve as a rubber stamp for the White House, or anyone else's, programming I believe you are wrong. There is nothing more vital to our student's success than outstanding teachers and outstanding parents. Allowing the teachers control over the content of their classrooms and allowing parents a voice in their child's education is vital to building the type of community that serves our children.

Thank you Fairfield ISD, Teague ISD, and Wortham ISD for making the decision to reach out to parents.

Kyle Hart Fairfield, TX 75840

* * * * * Dear Editor:

All these years we've been told to believe that schools were for education. In Freestone county, schools are not synonymous with education.

The people whose actions silenced the President failed to do their own homework, i.e. looking at www.whitehouse. gov\MediaResources \PreparedSchool Remarks.

President Obama's address to our nation's youth (read non-voters) was not political—-it was about the "E" word.

On September 8 the students in this community were taught to be disrespectful to the President of the United States of America. Jacqueline Nappo Fairfield

* * * * * Dear Editor:

At last Tuesday night's School Board Meeting, a standing room only crowd appeared before the board to gain insight on the reasoning behind the decision to allow the teachers a choice in showing President Obama's speech. Many in attendance felt that giving teachers a choice in showing the video subjects itself to decisions being made based on various biases.

It was brought to the board's attention that teachers aren't always given a choice to participate in other questionable school-related activities. After this concern was voiced, neither Superintendent Katie Ryan nor School Board President Ossie Outlaw acknowledged the crowd's concern.

I was disappointed, to say the least, that Superintendent Ryan did not immediately address the many parents and citizens who were clearly looking for a response. It was only after a question was raised later during Superintendent Ryan's speech about ageappropriate movies in the classroom that the topic returned to President Obama's speech.

When one of Fairfield's own educators stated how viewing the speech would have benefited her class, she received a rude and curt response from Mr. Outlaw.

I believe the speech should have been viewed and parents could use their right to opt-out if they felt this "stay in school" message was unsuitable for their children. Lesson plans that were to accompany the speech were modified to satisfy those that believed that this was some sort of indoctrination of the Obama administration. Some of these kids are allowed to spend countless hours in front of the TV or on the internet, yet they can't hear an inspiring message from our President?

It was stated during the school board meeting that the district received numerous calls both petitioning and supporting the President's speech. In the end, Fairfield ISD chose to listen to the manufactured outrage of extreme conservatives and place the decision to view the speech in the hands of the teachers.

In my opinion, Fairfield ISD missed two important learning points. The first one being an opportunity to teach our children that no matter what your political affiliation is, we should all respect our leaders, especially the Office of the Presidency. I am extremely disappointed and ashamed that we did not seize this moment to show our kids that President Obama is our Commander-in-Chief and deserves the respect as such. The second learning point was a chance to show our teachers that the district stands behind what is right and will not be influenced by the media.

Finally, there remains a bigger lesson for all adults to learn: Let's end the polarizing attacks that's dividing our country and causing baseless mass hysteria. Oh, and don't believe for a minute that our children didn't pick up on the real issue with President Obama addressing the nation's school children.

Sharon Gibson