In First Major Address to Congress, Obama Once Again Links Video Games to Academic Underachievement

As GamePolitics noted on several occasions, using video games as a metaphor for academic underachievement was a staple of Barack Obama’s presidential campaign speeches.

The Prez rolled out the same language last night in his first address to a joint session of Congress. Speaking about his administration’s approach to education, Obama said:

These education policies will open the doors of opportunity for our children. But it is up to us to ensure they walk through them. In the end, there is no program or policy that can substitute for a mother or father who will attend those parent/teacher conferences, or help with homework after dinner, or turn off the TV, put away the video games, and read to their child. I speak to you not just as a president, but as a father when I say that responsibility for our children’s education must begin at home.

A CNN poll reports that 65% of respondents gave the President favorable marks for the speech. NPR has a full transcript of the President’s remarks.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. 0
    Deamian says:

    "In the end, there is no program or policy that can substitute for a mother or father[…]"

    All in all, and also in personnal experience, academic underachievement does not come from video game usage. In fact, as a french-canadian, I’m thankful to have logged in so many hours in Zelda; A link to the past when I was younger, it taught me basic english skills, which gave me an edge in class over my peers. I don’t tell you how much video-games helped with math either.

    Also, you can’t blame video-games for being a direct cause of academic underachievement; who is letting their kids play video-games all day and not even insures they complete homework? Those who blame video-games for said underachievements, and desperatly vote bills to fill in their parental responsibilities. -coughUTAHcough.-

    In the end, Obama’s message is not exactly anti-video-game, but rather pro-family ; you don’t spend time with those you love/doing homework if you spend it killing aliens/zombies/stuff in front of a T.V./screen. It’s a logical time-availability issue. Considering Obama included net-neutrality in his economic stimulus package, the video-game industry already owes a "Thank you!" to a certain someone.

  2. 0
    olstar18 says:

    You have got to be very careful about telling people the truth when you are in public office for the simple reason that most people do not want to know the truth unless it blames someone other than themselves.

  3. 0
    TBoneTony says:

    Yes, I do believe that some of us are being over sensitive because we have been soo desnsitized by politicians blaming videogames for violence and obesity that sometimes we do even fear everytime when a single politicians even says the word videogame that we instantly start to think it might be another politician bashing videogames.

    This is nothing new from Obama, although I would like to say that some books like Harry Potter are not really that educational for kids, but even so, they are fun to read for many kids and I feel that parents don’t really have a true understanding that Videogames are allot like books in a way.


  4. 0
    TBoneTony says:

    Reading carefully, I don’t think that Obama links games to underachivement as much as he also says about TV and other things.

    Although if I happen to play an RPG or a Japanese Virtual novel, guess what? I AM reading.

    But I am reading something that my parents would not really consider educational though.

  5. 0
    Arcanagos says:

    I really dont see the problem with this… he’s saying parents should take responsibility for their kids… and isnt that what gamers have been saying for years?

    "Go ahead and hate your neighbor, go ahead and cheat a friend. Do it in the name of Heaven, Jack Thompson’ll justify it in the end." – nightwng2000

  6. 0

    Myeh. Not too bad. Let’s not have him ignore the family oppurtunities presented by a multiplayer game though. Or the massive amounts of reading in RPG’s.

  7. 0
    Positive_Gamer says:

    Just to point out, a lot of what he said last night, including the video game remark, was recycled from previous speeches and statements.  He said absolutely nothing new last night.

  8. 0
    gamadaya says:

    I can’t really argue against him. I’m trying to cut back on videogames because I want to devote more time to studying.


    Internet troll > internet paladin

  9. 0
    entr0py says:

    I think we’re being overly sensitive here. From the quote it seems he was just listing a couple of popular forms of entertainment. Yes, playing video games isn’t a substitute for doing your homework. This is true of any other leasure activity a kid might engage in. He could just as easily have said "put down the basketball and turn off the radio"  and we wouldn’t jump to the conslusion that he’s implying team sports or popular music are the cause of acidemic failure.

    But he’s right, kids are pretty bad at managing their time. You can’t just leave them alone and expect they’ll get all their homework done.

  10. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    1) A, but I say it with an immense amount of sarcasm.  Eventually, I find and stab him, then proceed to hunt him and only him for the rest of the round.

    2) B; I don’t take orders from anyone in my home.  I’ll come to dinner when I damn well please.  Plus, it’d be awkward to have a corpse calling me to dinner.

  11. 0
    Geoff says:

    "Before joining an online game ask yourself ‘Am I an asshole?’ if the answer is no, you may proceed."

    And on the day that is ever implemented, the online gaming community would be reduced to about five guys.


    Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!

  12. 0
    GoodRobotUs says:

    Still can’t argue with his intent, which is to get Parents involved with their childrens’ lives, which is, after all, what we’ve been saying from the word go.

  13. 0
    Cerabret100 says:

    1) A, because he probably is, and i’m sure i’m walking right in to his fire like a dumbass

    2)A, because if she really wanted to, she could probably kick my ass, though if it was going well, b for about one more minute.

  14. 0
    Mechadon says:

    I think this is a bit of an over-reaction.

    On the other hand, political addresses like this are carefully crafted with every word having specific meaning. The consistency in bringing up video games in the topic of academic achievement seems to be a set-up for a future purpose. Obama has avoided direct issues and concerns regarding games. My guess is he isn’t a huge fan of games, and may be open to future legislation. At the same time he wants to retain appeal for a younger audience, which is why I believe he remains somewhat neutral for the time being.

    Or, this could just be an over-reaction.

    You get what I’m saying???

  15. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    That is now a nationwide rating. Most any other approval rating before was primarily Democrat is polling. This now incorporates all Political parties so there will be some tipping do the number of Republicans in the polls now.

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA

    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  16. 0
    Praetorian says:

    While he is not singling out video games, I am still _very_ skeptical about this speech. This seems almost like a way to ease to american public into the tank of government regulation of media.

    While I believe parents need to get off their asses and do some parenting, like he suggests, I dislike how he just skirts around the issue.

    Grow a pair and just tell us exactly what you think! While it may not be popular or what people want to hear — more people might actually start to listen to you.


    "I’ve been told I’m the resident skeptic, but I wouldn’t believe that."

    ECA Seattle Chapter

  17. 0
    Canary Wundaboy says:

    1) c

    2) a

    Yeah I know about 1)….but I wouldn’t be able to help myself. Tbh I’d probably use a different expletive though, ‘fag’ is just a bit too….pre-pubescent-American-teenager for me.

  18. 0
    Nocturne says:

    There needs to be some sort of multiple choice test

    1) You are playing Call of Duty 4 and FragMaster675 has just killed you by a headshot for the third time, you still don’t know his position. Do you call him:

    a) A skilled player

    b) A cheater

    c) A fag


    2) You are plaing Gears of War and your Mother tells you it’s five minutes til dinner is ready, do you:

    a) Apologies to your team mates and tell them you have to finish as soon as this round is over.

    b) Ignore her.

    c) Call her a fag.

  19. 0
    Krono says:

    Before joining an online game ask yourself ‘Am I an asshole?’ if the answer is no, you may proceed.

    I’m almost positive the vast majority of assholes do not think of themselves as such.


  20. 0
    Nocturne says:

    If you’ve ever seen the video clips of Xbox live with a kid screaming to his mom that he wants chocolate milk, not mountain dew, or the kid repeating fag throughout gears of war,  I’m sure you’ll agree that there are kids out there who could do with a lot less time playing video games and more time learning how to not be a complete failure at life

    Before joining an online game ask yourself ‘Am I an asshole?’ if the answer is no, you may proceed.

  21. 0
    Demzon says:

    The only unsettling part about this is that it suggests he sees games as children’s toys.

    I don’t see anything about that. There was no reference to age of those playing the games or watching the TV. I would admit myself that I need to watch when I’m playing. People are reading in what they expect to hear way to much anymore, and they really need to start listening to what is actually said.

    Also, publishers of any type need to stop allowing sensationalist articles from being published. Where are the editors who had the job of filtering out this type of crap is years gone? I would say that this takes a notch out of credibility for me as far as this place is concerned.

  22. 0
    State says:

    So because Obama has said something negative about games this would have come from Clinton? Can’t Obama be independent on his thoughts on games, or is it because it is something you disagree with it has to have come from someone else and not him? He is the one who said it, he has to be responsible for what he says and he has to agree with what he says.

    From history we know he is hypocritical on games as he has complained about people playing on them whilst at the same time advertising his own campaign in them.

  23. 0
    Randomavatar says:

    Didnt see that in there, just that kids do play games. Which they do, and there are games for kids, so they do fit under the very broad market. Nothing in what he said proclaims games are exclusively for children.

    He isnt singling them out as children’s toys.

  24. 0
    Zerodash says:

    The only unsettling part about this is that it suggests he sees games as children’s toys.  Hillary is in his cabinet (albeit in non-domestic affars post), and you never know what bile she is putting in his ear…

  25. 0
    Inferno_str1ke says:

    I agree – Obama’s comment was quite sensible, he wasn’t saying "OMG GAMEz R EV1l" or anything like that – he was merely pointing out that parent’s need to read to their children or just take some form of interest in order to encourage learning. Good on the man – I don’t mind opinions like this, just the tripe that claims we’re teaching people to kill.

  26. 0
    Mr.Pat says:

    Lessee, gun-obsessive, hateful, bitter, superiority complex-laden, holier-than-thou attitude, Bush-worshipping…yup, you’ve pretty much confirmed just about every republican stereotype out there in about 2 days, so congrats on that?

    Where to begin, where to begin, lets start with that blind hatred that you seem to be in constant denial over. You seem to have a great disliking of having your arguement reduced to that, don’t you? Well tough shit. You’ve gone on the record of stating that any and all criticisms of your Glorious King George W. Jesus are nothing but blind hatred, but now with a democrat in the white house you expect every attack you make to be justified and righteous while constantly wishing for him to fail – doesn’t work that way. You chose to dismiss everything negative to dubya as blind hatred, and now you’re getting and will continue to get the exact same treatment back whether you like it or not. Maybe if you weren’t so partisan to the point you couldn’t admit to any mistakes he made you wouldn’t have your arguements washed over. Furthermore, I guarantee that if McCain had won last November and pushed for the exact same thing you’d be lapping it up like it was mana from heaven, just like you were when Bush tried to pass his own $700B bailout before his term ended, before it got rejected that is.

    Which brings me to this bailout. Did I read it? Well how about I just directly quote the answer you gave when someone DARED to ask if you read it, since it fits rather perfectly:

     "Actually, I have.  Any other moronic questions?"

  27. 0
    olstar18 says:

    Just so you know I voted for obama in election and primary. I do not hate him to the contrary I belive that of the candidates he is the most likely to fix bush’s mess. However I do not look at his proposed stimulus plan and ignore the problems. Money to buy hybrid cars for government workers and money to fund aids research may do a lot of good but they should not be in a bill meant to revamp the economy. I know the hybrid cars part is mainly to give the automotive industry business but I would rather them use that money to build a much needed prison or repair a few schools, both would create much needed jobs and would take care of problems that need dealt with. I would also like some money to go to building windmills or even a nuke plant or two and hopefully reduce dependance on oil for electricity. The nuke plant probably wont happen but the windmills would be a possibility. In fact I know of a few farmers up north who have leased out portions of their land to have some built on it.

  28. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    Sucks for you, man.  Most firearms dealers won’t even SHIP to California anymore, especially those who make superior equipment.  Try and buy an STI pistol new from their Texas- based armory.  You can’t.  I’m also fairly certain that you can’t have semi-automatic rifles that have pistol grips with more than 10 round magazines, and the magazines have to require a ‘tool’ to detach.

  29. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    Having more firearms in the hands of people with CCW licenses has absolutely been shown to make the streets safer, in fact.  Look at what happened when the last AWB was implemented.  Violent crime went UP.  Now, let’s look at the areas where CCW’s are not issued at all.  Oh, wow.  California?  High violent crime rate.  New York City?  Same deal.  Boston?  Oh my god. 
    Wait, other countries?  Let’s see… oh yes, their violent crime rates went up too. 

    It doesn’t matter if they have lower crime rates, what’s important to look at is the change in violent crime.  Every country that bans firearms, especially pistols, sees an increase in violent crimes.  Look at Australia.

  30. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    To start off with, HAVE YOU EVEN LOOKED AT THE BILL FOR YOURSELF?  Have you actually read the bill at all?  Because if not, I want you to go and spend a week and read the 1000+ pages, and then get back to me.  This bill doesn’t create jobs, it puts money into organizations that have wasted BILLIONS befer, and will continue to waste BILLIONS without producing anything for the American people. You want to create jobs?  Train 10000 gunsmiths, our police NEED them.  Build some Nuclear Power plants, we could really use them.  Don’t give the money to states to spend on state projects that are wasteful.

    But I have another question. When has any ONE bill in history spent 787 Billion dollars?  This isn’t an everyday occurence.  This is an ASTOUNDING, and HORRIFYING precedent.  This is the HEIGHT of massive spending.  And guess what? NONE of it will create new jobs.  If you look at the bill, and do some research for yourself, you’ll find that few if any of the projects outlined in the bill produce jobs. 

    So how does this tie into a ‘blind hatred’ you jackass?  What, I have to hate him, just because I can’t stand the moronic things he’s doing with tax money? Right, its obviously a blind hatred, not disdain based on his stance, the fact that he obviously has no plan whatsoever, the fact that he hasn’t stopped campaigning yet, or the fact that so many of his campaign promises have been lies.

  31. 0
    Mr.Pat says:

    Well as long as he remains a registered republican, writing for HumanEvents, supporting Ann Coulter, and claiming to be a republican, I’m going to label him one, right there with his buddy Austin.

  32. 0
    Shadow D. Darkman says:

    Actually, Jack’s not as much of a Republican as you would think. He simply backed the side he thought was going to win. He switched to Obama (taking the name michelleobamarama in the process) after it was pretty much obvious [Obama] was going to win.


  33. 0
    The Hangd Man says:


    As a straight guy living in San Francisco (and the owner of a rifle as well) some people might take umbrage to your comments, olstar. Not that I’m highly offended or anything, I’m just tired of people taking the same old cheap shots at my city.

  34. 0
    Mr.Pat says:

    Its often said that the people who feel the need to brag about their lives on the internet tend to be amongst the biggest liars on the subject – so I can’t help but find it sad that you’d be jealous of his attempts at being superior to everyone else. I mean really, if you want another shining example, just look at his fellow republican Jack Thompson.


    And if you want his points refuted, well how about he explains how having more guns on the street will lead to lower crime rates and better safety when nations with more gun restrictions have vastly lower crime and homicide rates per capita than we do? 


  35. 0
    Mr.Pat says:

    Yes, I know, just because you don’t like how the money is going, its automatically wrong and a waste and evil, I’ve heard this schtick enough times by now to get that from you. Frankly, if you are so desparate to have your precious firearms made a top priority then maybe you should be contacting your politicians to actually try for that, instead of continually whining on a here how the big bad Obama is going to ruin your nation because of your blind hatred of the man.

    But feel free to keep whining about massive spending only when democrats do it, it just shows how partisan you are.

  36. 0
    Mr.Pat says:

    So tell me whats worse then, giving a president ample time to prove themself (which one month out of 48 is not), like I do for every president, or continually wishing for their failure as soon as they are sworn in like your dear friend austin has been on the record of doing?


    You’d think someone who continually claims to want the best for his country wouldn’t be so bitter and spiteful just because his guy didn’t win, but blind hatred will do just that to a person apparantly.

    You’d also think that someone who would go on the record of stating that any and all criticism of the last president was nothing but "blind hatred" would not resort to a double standard of blatantly expressing nothing BUT blind hatred of their new president – then again I think I’m the type to give adequate time to judge a presidency, so maybe its just me.

  37. 0
    BrandonL337 says:

    I hear that.

    There have always been motherf*ckers, there will always be motherf*ckers, but what we can’t do is let them control our motherf*cking lives. -John Oliver, December 1st, 2008

  38. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    If you can scrape together 300 dollars, you might be able to find a nice savage with the older, non ‘accu-trigger’ trigger.  If you can get 500, you can get a savage with the accu-trigger.  Of course, you could also do what I did when I was young, and buy an old WWII bolt action rifle.  I had a mosin nagant, a real beater, that cost me 60 dollars.  probably more expensive now, but I still have it.

  39. 0
    olstar18 says:

    I’m kinda jealous. I live in the south and I dont have enough money to buy a rifle. Thats like a straight guy living in san fransisco. And Austin the reeal reason he aint refuting your points is whether or not he wants to admit it everything there is true and painfuly so.

  40. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    Actually, you can find solutions by filling actual needs, instead of making things up to spend money on.  Maybe your head is too far up your ass to understand this, but every so often, a weapon needs maintenance that your average cop can’t perform.  It can be sent to an armorer, back to the manufacturer (which will be a 3 month wait), or to a gunsmith.  However, because there are so few gunsmiths, often the weapons must be sent to the manufacturer for those repairs.  Gunsmiths are also necessary for SWAT snipers, and a SWAT team is something every major city NEEDS. 

    But by all means, let’s just waste 787 billion dollars and pretend we’re being productive.

  41. 0
    Mr.Pat says:

    Right, sure you are – I’m sure everyone here is sooo jealous of what you claim your life to be. Then again, if being hateful and bitter is a prereq for large houses and overpriced firearms, I think I’ll stick to the paradise I have right now.

  42. 0
    Mr.Pat says:

    Why am I not surprised you would go on to claim guns and tax cuts/credits as a solution?


    But by all means let your blind hatred of a man in office for a month control your thought process.

  43. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    Way to refute my points.  Of course, its hard to care too much, seeing as I’m writing from my 8000 square foot house and preparing to go to the rifle range to fire my rifle that probably costs more than most people’s cars.

  44. 0
    Mr.Pat says:

    Hey, if you want to have no recourse should the government turn tyrannical, and if you’re okay with relying on police who have less firearms training than I do, that’s fine.  I’m self reliant.

    Of course, perhaps my thinking has been warped by all my travel, my two doctorates, and the fact that I’ve done research in the ghettos of America.  Or maybe it means my viewpoint is a bit more accurate than yours.  Who knows?


    An internet toughguy and an internet scholar? Classic!

  45. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    Hey, if you want to have no recourse should the government turn tyrannical, and if you’re okay with relying on police who have less firearms training than I do, that’s fine.  I’m self reliant.

    Somewhere along the way, we seem to, as a society, have fallen, for the most part, into a ‘sheep’ mentality (Probably one of the only things LTC. Grossman’s gotten right lately).  Sheep like to think that the world is a safe place, and that others will protect them.  For some people, that’ll be true.  They’ll be lucky and live their whole lives without ever experiencing a confrontation with someone who wants to prey on them.  But the reality is, the world is not a nice place.  Police don’t have to help you, and individuals rarely will help you.  Learn to help yourself, or go suckle on the government teat. 

    Of course, perhaps my thinking has been warped by all my travel, my two doctorates, and the fact that I’ve done research in the ghettos of America.  Or maybe it means my viewpoint is a bit more accurate than yours.  Who knows?

    The real question here is why should someone be able to legislate away my rights just because they don’t feel safe around guns?  If you don’t feel safe around the, DONT BUY ONE!  I had a neighbor once who always asked me to help him cut down trees in his back yard.  Why?  He didn’t feel safe operating a chainsaw.  Same prinicple applies here.  Don’t sign legislation that will increase our crime rate just because you don’t feel comfortable with people having the freedom, and don’t assume that a leader is magnificent just because he’s new.

  46. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    Actually, most of my talking points come from, you know, experience, having seen what happens when you throw money at problems, having seen what happens when you waste billions on useless programs instead of useful programs, and of course from spending a lot of time observing what various state/city governments do with the money they take from the federal government. I also think with libertarian views (I’m pro gay marriage and pro abortion, just because I don’t feel it’s my right to legislate your morality.  Obviously, some things will never be acceptable, but why can’t gays get married?  Makes no sense.), and of course with my view on the 2nd amendment, the amendment on which all others rest.

    My favorite (and easiest) example comes from Cincinnati.  Cincinnati faces a real problem; their prisons are full.  Overflowing, in fact.  And a great use for that money that Strickland is about to rake in would be to build and staff a new prison.  That would create at least 500 jobs all told.  But no.  It’s being spent on ridiculous projects, a trolley right through an area called Over the Rhine to the entertainment ‘district’.  Nevermind that A) no one with money to spend at the entertainment district wants to ride through over the rhine at dark and B)the entertainment district in Cincy brings in far less money than Newport, which is right across the border. In other words, this trolley will be a multi-million dollar waste of money that creates few jobs and will need to be repaired and repainted constantly due to rampant vandalism it will experience.

    You want to know something we could do to create jobs?  Offer tax credit or something for people who are willing to get degrees in gunsmithing.  Many civilians, police and 3 letter agencies are finding it harder and harder to find good gunsmiths, and the ones that are around are people in their sixties with too much work to do.  We could fill an easy 10000 jobs that pay pretty well just by offering an incentive to be a gunsmith.  Look there, I created 10000 jobs, and I didn’t need to lie about how to do it or the cost.  Nor did I need to make an overly complicated bill that wasted 1.3 trillion when all was said and done.


  47. 0
    SounDemon says:

    "I got a crush on a pretty pistol
    Should I tell her I feel this way?
    Father told us to be faithful

    I got a crush on a pretty pistol
    Should I tell her I feel this way?
    Got love songs in my head
    Killing us away

    Do you love your guns? Yeah!
    God? Yeah!
    The Government? FUCK YEAH."


    I couldn’t resist the obligatory Love Song reference; also, I’d say Austin is a bit CLINGY and BITTER, no?


  48. 0
    Mr.Pat says:

    I’m pretty sure he’s just suffering from Obama Derangement Syndrome, what with his blind hatred of the man thats reached the point where he just wants him to fail to justify his position.

  49. 0
    Krono says:

    I’m pretty sure that the only place that Austin’s talking points come from is his own wallet, and his gun locker. Possibly a few from his religon.


  50. 0
    KaylaKaze says:

    Doesn’t matter. He’s the de facto leader of the republican party so if you’re getting your talking points from O’Liely or the Manatee, they’re still coming first from the gas bag.

  51. 0
    Geoff says:

    Including comments, it took 16 posts before the inevitable thread-jacking of "I don’t like Obama because <insert issue that doesn’t pertain to the article here>". 

    Longer than I expected.


    Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!

  52. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    Many governors are wasting the stimulus money that they were given to spend on local ‘stimulation’.  Why?  Because they can pump money into their personal projects.  If I recall, Omaha needs police equipment.  Cincinnati needs a new prison.  Charlotte needs money for its illegal immigrant problem.  But none of the money is going to that. 

    PS: I don’t listen to Rush Limbaugh.  I met him in person once, and the only useful thing he told me was the address of a local tobaccinist.  Try again.

  53. 0
    SounDemon says:

    You know what I love about Republicans? They can never stop repeating the talking points given to them by Rush Limbaugh, and attempt to make lies truth by saying them enough times.

    Stop it, I’m sick of it; I get it at home, now I’m getting it at GP. Come up with something NEW AND CONSTRUCTIVE, Austin, and maybe you won’t just be another endlessly bleating elephant.

  54. 0
    olstar18 says:

    Just think a few generations ago you would have a reporter from every paper at a major event and each oe would have a different take on what happend but now you have one reporter from the ap and every paper reprints that one article. Whats the point of having 15 newspapers.

  55. 0
    TBoneTony says:

    But isn’t this site called GamePolitics,

    when videogames and politics are in the same issue together?

    But yeah, even Gamepolitics likes to spin stories like most other news media, but unlike other news media, GamePolitics provides secondary information that we can look up on the links that they provide in the article to do our own research on what has been said.

    So in a way, I trust Game Politics more than any of the mainstreem news media in my country that can only tell me just one side of the story but not allow me to delve into the story further to find out what the full story is.

  56. 0
    The Hangd Man says:

    I would say that Dennis is probably going to put up Obama everytime that he makes a comment about video games. That would make some sense considering that 1. Obama is a politician; 2. The comment involves video games; and 3. this is a blog about politics and video games.

    Perhaps Kotaku or Destructoid might be a better news site for you if you do not want to read about what politicians say (sometimes repeatedly, sometimes as-nauseam) about video games.

  57. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    Now now, that’s not entirely true; he also often lies or exaggerates about what the near-trillion dollars he took from the taxpayers are going to do.

  58. 0
    PHX Corp says:

    Dennis, How many times are you Going to Give Barack obama more Face time on GP, could we stop it for once(it’s always the same thing coming from his mouth. Turn off the TV, put away the video games and read to your children for once)

    Watching JT on GP is just like watching an episode of Jerry springer only as funny as the fights

  59. 0
    Randomavatar says:

    This doesnt say games are addicitive, it doesnt link games to violence or even equate them directly with underachievement.


    What it says is that games take time, and time management should be favoured towards scholarly pursuits, doing homework and reading books. Because most kids won’t do that normally.

    This isnt any form of condemnation so I don’t see the problem.

  60. 0
    Shadow D. Darkman says:

    Well, EZK, after careful observation, I have arrived at the conclusion that PHX’s definition of "too many" in this particular case would be one (1) article about Obama and video games.


  61. 0
    mredria says:

    Don’t some video games encourage reading though? I mean.. if you didn’t read some games you couldn’t play them. Like pokemonz.

    Personally, even when the games are put away, I find plenty of things to occupy myself other then work. I’m looking at you, Cellphones.

    -I apologize-

  62. 0
    hellfire7885 says:

    Well, to his credit he is preaching parental rather than govermental/industrial responsibility.

    Is frustrating that he singled out video games though. There are far more detrimental factors to education than just that.

  63. 0
    Cerabret100 says:

    hey, it’s true, i know many people (myself included) who would…not necessarily do better, but be less time crunched if the games were put away for at least an hour more than normal.

  64. 0
    Geoff says:

    Don’t see that much of an issue there.  Video games were not that singled out as he included it with watching TV.  Likewise he’s preaching parental involvment not some form of legislation.

    Wonder how long before this thread gets jacked by someone complaining about one of Obama’s policies that has nothing to do with video games…


    Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!

Leave a Reply