I still like him. better lazy than violant psyco

Is there more productive things children can do besides video games? Eh, probably. Are they as fun? Maybe. They should find a balance, for it is a disciprine... Yoi yoi!

I watched his speech last night and I kind of saw this coming, but at the same time I hoped that it would be seen in my context.

Let's face it, we play video games to kill time and entertain ourselves (unless you're a tourney gamer like Fata1ity who makes a living out of it) and that's a good thing. Now what's the old saying? Too much of a good thing is a bad thing. What he means is that kids shouldn't be playing games and watching TV 24/7 and not doing their schoolwork and I agree with him. I only turn on my consoles when all of my homework is done.

He's talking about putting then away- not censoring them. I stiill will vote for him.

What about educational TV and video games? Not only that, but you can also be with your child and expand the learning even more from it. Play time together and learning.

I feel as though he left the many genres of TV and games were left out. You can turn anything like that to positive.

I don't think he was bashing games, he was bashing parents who let TV and games do the parenting for them. I think most people would agree that is a problem. He's saying "put away the electronic baby sitters and be a parent by interacting with your child".

Don't look at everything so dang pessimistically.

@T5
"Give Obama a pass, he's earned it."
What exactly has he done to earn such a free pass?

@Muninn:

Obama said it himself: "We’re going to have to parent better..."

To him that means turning off the TV and video games and actually raising the kid themselves. He's concerned of the disconnect forming between parents and children in today's society. It could be games, television, the internet...anything that parents plop their kids in front of rather than raise them.

He is not saying “video games are bad for our children”. He's saying "bad parents are bad for our children".

[...] Unlike rival Hillary Clinton, Democratic presidential frontrunner Barack Obama does not have a significant track record with regard to video game content issues. [...]

Additionally, Obama doesn't have a track record for virtually ANYTHING. I think the best way to judge a candidate is through what they've voted for, and so far, I'm pretty Obama hasn't voted for very much, and I live in Illinois, so I would know.
I'll bet Barack's feeling pretty lucky right now. He doesn't have a horrid track record like Clinton, mainly because he hasn't been in office long enough, so he decides to run for president. Oh, and he's African American. And a Liberal. So of course the media runs straight to him.

still better than Hillary by about 6 Billion percent.

i'd rather have someone indifferent to games than actively trying to censor them.

I applaud the man for his intentions of improving the education of his nation's children, and putting forward the idea of instilling them with a desire to further and better themselves, but I just don't agree at all with him using video games as an example of something that stands in the way of this goal. Children are perfectly capable of playing video games AND getting good grades/succeeding at school, it's all a matter of balance.

"We’re going to have to parent better, and turn off the television set, and put the video games away, and instill a sense of excellence in our children, and that’s going to take some time."

Better parenting, I approve of. Turn off the tv? I would argue that a lot of what is on tv is atrocious these days, with all the vapid chat shows and mindless reality tv, as well as the promotion of the ignorant and unworthy as celebrities, kids are better off with less tv. Instill a sense of excellence in kids? Damn right! There is no more effective way of making a child better at something, than making them WANT to be better.

But finally, he says we have to put the video games away. I understand that a kid who is aiming for good grades will have to switch off their console/pc and study, but that does not mean that when they have their homework/study done that they can't play games to relax. It's a passtime like any other, if you spend too long at it and neglect your studies, your grades will reflect this.

I wonder what the reaction might have been had Obama said: "We've got to turn off the tv, put down the basketballs and footballs, and instill a sense of...."

Or can you imagine the outrage if his words were: "We've got to turn off the tv, stop spending our time in church and praying, and instill a sense of...."

It doesn't matter what the activity is, any hobby can co-exist with successful studies as long as it is in moderation. Worked for me...

Shoehorn O'Plenty, B.Sc, avid gamer.

I'm like probably most here who don't like him refereing to games in a bad way, however, like most, he's probably the best canidate for being president, and atleast he's not saying "Games are evil" stuff like Clinton says.

Also, I can't really disagree with it, as lets be honest, playing video games is lazy, wheather it's fun or not.

Anyway as a non US person anyway, I don't have a say who'd be president but I still hope it's Obama.

Of course, he did say turn off the TV. So it's not video games being singled out.

@BlackIce

I recall another presidential hopeful that did not just single out video games yet the community lambasted him to no end

Give Obama a pass, he's earned it

From what I've read, there's nothing wrong with his speech unless you're a couch potato or a basement dweller (ie. those who do nothing but watch TV or play games while contributing nothing to society)

He's basically saying "give TV and Videogames a rest for a bit" That's different compard to "Imma go bannin the vidya gaems111!11"

[...] Original post by GamePolitics Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]

Yeah, Romney classified games, TV and movies as a "cesspool of violence that needs to be cleaned up"

I feel for the most part that our hobby's been slammed around so much for the past few years left us a bit sensitive. D:

Good to see how some of us still reconize that something like this wasn't an attack on video games itself.

Well... a metaphor can be taken different ways. He's not claiming 'vidya geimz r teh evil,' he's just saying parents need to get more involved with their children, which they should.

"We’re going to have to parent better, and turn off the television set, and put the video games away, and instill a sense of excellence in our children, and that’s going to take some time."

Responsible moderation as compared to outright banning...hmm...melikes what I hear from Obama

Hillary wants to ban 'em...
Obama wants kids to find something more productive...........
Obama > Hillary by about 5000423783248782344 points.
That's... 5000000000454385345345252535235 points for Barack, -49 for Hillary.

If I had to choose between obama and hillary, I'd abstain. Neither gets my vote because they both fail on a level that I don't want in my leader.

There is nothing wrong with what he said there. He didn't say that we need to ban games, or stop playing them entirely. I think that the general spirit of what he's saying is that parents need to be a bit stricter and control how much time there kids are spending doing these things so that they can focus on studying more. It's good advice.

Everything needs to be in moderation, or it becomes bad for you.

I like Obama. He's taking the correct approach of getting parents to do their job.

yeah..so video games invite laziness. a fair opinion i think...though he is a bit wrong for generalizing..but that's what I expect of all non gamers.

@ Mogbert:

"“Put down the video games” is something that has to be done from time to time. Games aren’t life, they are a part of life, and if you can’t put them down then something is wrong with you."

I understand this but my problem with his comment is that he singles out video games. Why not say "Put down the football" or "Put down the prayer book"? Sports and religion are a part of many people's lives, yet spending time on them at the expense of your studies will affect your education. If people can't put them down, then something is wrong with them, yet video games are highlighted in Obama's comment.

I believe he should have worded things more ambiguously while still retaining the message of encouraging children's education and acting responsibly in supporting it. eg. "We’re going to have to parent better, make sure our children don't skip their studies for anything else, and instill a sense of excellence in our children, and that’s going to take some time."

It may not have the same punch as "Turn off the tv! Turn off the video games!" but it is more reasonable and covers any activity that kids might spend their time at instead of studying, be it sports, video games, hanging out at the mall, etc.

I don't really find anything wrong with Obama's comment. However you spin it, He's basically saying "BE A PARENT, RAISE YOUR DAMN KIDS, DON'T LET THE TV RAISE THEM FOR YOU".

Which honestly, is a stance that I think we all can agree on.

Don't have a problem with someone saying 'We need to ignore the distractions and focus on the problems', it's certainly better thought out and more intelligent than 'put down the controller and get a life'...

"Barack Obama does not have a significant track record with regard to video game content issues."
He doesn't have a real track record about ANYTHING. Maybe if he were to spend his term as a Senator actually VOTING on things, I'll give him a more serious look. Charisma for me counts for shit. I want a voting record and capitol hill experience. No speech can hide what you have done there.

@T5
"Give Obama a pass, he’s earned it"
Not with a very Democratic "nanny state" mentality, I will not. I shall remain skeptical and fearful as I always have.

Thomas P's hit it right on the head folks, Obama's not calling for the ratings system to be overhauled like Hillary, he's calling on parents to actually do their jobs and parent their kids aggressively, not be a passive parent.

And to the above poster who said they were gonna abstain and not vote for either candidate, all that I have to say is that we can do a hell of a better job than our current president, that's all.

Obama is all hot air with no solutions. We've been saying [to parents] to get up and raise your kids [this includes not letting them games all day or don't buy your 5 yr old GTA20X6], but first, how is it the Executive Branch of our Federeal Government's job to tell people how to raise their kids, and second, just HOW will he do it?

We all yell at Hitlery for Nanny-stateism, but when Obama just words it differently, we lap it up. Look, when I want a spiritual leader, I'll talk to a Priest, Reverend, Immam, Cleric, Rabbi, Monk, Zen master, or my mother. Not a Democratic Presidential candidate.

A President has no business telling people how to raise their kids. Even when we agre with his ideas. IT'S NOT HIS JOB.

@ L42yb:

"Football, as a sport, brings a *lot* of money into the country. Way more than video games do. And playing football can lead to a career, whereas an actual career playing games (while possible) is much more unlikely."

I understand that football is a big business, but how many kids out of the millions that play as a pass time go on to be professionals and make a career out of it? As time goes on and the gaming industry grows, there are more and more jobs available in the gaming industry and this trend should continue. I actually work myself playing and testing games in the localization sector so it's not impossible :)

"As for “prayer books”, that’s pushing it way too far. Religion is not meant to be a hobby (and don’t bother pointing out to me how it is like a hobby for lots of people, that is not my point. My point is that it is *meant* to be a way of life, not a hobby). If he actually said “It’s time to put down the prayer books” he would be comitting political suicide, so it is unfair to expect him to do it.""

I never said that it had to be a hobby, or that religion was like one. I'm talking about the fact that of all the other things you could do with your time other than studying, video games is brought up as an example and I find this a little bit unfair. If you take 3 kids, one spends all his time playing video games, another plays football and another goes to church for hours and prays. None of them are spending their time studying and all will have lower grades than other kids. It doesn't matter a damn which activity you prefer or approve of, none of them are contributing to the child's academic improvement. It just smacks a little of pandering and ignorance to single out games like this.

"So come on, give Obama a break and acknowledge that what he is saying is not really a bad thing at all."

I know it's a good thing he is saying, I just don't appreciate the way he has a little jab at one of my preferred pass times in the way he says it.

"He could have also said “waste less time on non-productive entertainment and media and more time improving yourself”. Would that have made you happy?"

Honestly, it would have. No one activity is singled out as worse than another and the the message that kids have to balance their time and commit to their studies is still there. I understand that perhaps the image of kids sitting in front of the screens doing nothing is ingrained in society, but if a child is not doing enough study, whether they are sitting at a screen or running and kicking a ball in a field makes no difference to me.

Obama said if government regulation is necessary, it shall be done. Hillary wants government regulation even though it is not necessary. There is your difference.

Who wrote this post?

The political bias shows quite a bit here. This is the best attack on Obama the writer can come up with?

I agree with all the sentiments spoken here which say that Obama's stance on video games is not entirely unfounded. As much as i value the content of this site and its reporting, i do feel it's a bit extreme to make note of one line in a speech by a politician who shows no signs of anti-video game sentiments.

When he is telling us to "put away the video games," he is right. He doesn't mean get rid of video games entirely. I see this as a stance that children today, whether it's TV, Movies, or Games, are spending too much time on entertainment and not enough on education. This is not entirely untrue. I do not beleive Barack Obama wants us to destroy all television sets, so why beleive he has even remotely hostile intentions towards video games? I think it is merely an understanding that, just like any entertainment medium, video games are a hobby and an escapism that should be enjoyed but not allowed to consume your life.

If that is indeed his point, then i see no reason to disagree.

@Pichi -

He is generalising. And it's not really an unfair generalisation...

The speach kinda loses it's punch when you try to cover every single possible base with every sentence you speak... I understand this, so his statements about games do not bother me. In general, they are true.

@Josh -

I think that the vast majority of kids in the US today spend a lot more time watching TV and playing games than reading fiction, going to plays or going to movies. He could have listed them all, but once again your speach loses it's ability to get through to the masses when you start getting so specific about *everything* you say.

Sure, he could have used a term like "non-constructive media and entertainment" but the strategy he is using is trying to strike a chord with a specific audience. In such cases, it is better to list some specific mediums that will be widely recognised. Is that such a bad thing? Yes, he is a politician, but he is still the best choice out the bunch available this election (IMO).

@the1jeffy -

You say "hot air", I say sound advice. I don't think that advising parents is a bad thing at all... obviously you think it is, altho I'm not sure why it annoys you so much. I agree that it is a political strategy, and games are targetted because they are a hot topic, but at least he is not attacking them outright like some other candidates are...

I would be interested to know who you support as a candidate, and why, since you are clearly against Obama...

I guess the video game industry will come to a standstill when either president enters office.

@T5

I completely support Obama. I was defending him then.

I also defend Obama's statements. Video games are awesome and my favorite hobby, but spending all your time just playing video games is just not good.

Wasn't Obama the one who said his daughters play Game Boy or DS? This is fine. And it sure is a hell of a lot better than Clinton's rhetoric concering games.

Go Obama!!

I don't think he's blaming the games as much as saying children are using them as an excuse. Besides I've taken him with a grain of salt sing the "Can wwe do it?" speech.

I would ask him if that is merely a suggestion. It sounds like one to me, but I'd just like to make sure.

Lol. What the heck is this garbage? The article is totally twisting what Obama is saying. Haven't seen propaganda this bad since the 1st W.Bush term.

@Shoehorn

You said it best I think. Will you be sending a similar letter to Obama? Maybe throw in that video games fall under music and art. Or least they CAN fall under it?

factor in that he IS trying to do something good for all gamers, the less annoying yankee kids on xbox live the better!

/haethaethaet

I do reckon that he has the best interests of all people at heart, and I totally agree that young children should not be playing 24/7, if anything this further reinforces my belief that he is the president we have all been waiting for!

(and he looks like an old Lewis Hamilton!)

@Muninn:
I'd like to point out that Obama was referring directly to parents. He's not targeting video games that agressively, oy. Remember one of the earlier articles? He wants the parents to take more responsibility, oy.

@Muninn

Right, taking his words as it is, he's "unfairly" targetting games. But the truth is, it was a couple of words in his speech for one, and the other is he's drawing on something that's become an icon. Gaming as bad for children or making children lazy has been a message that's long been playing, and gamers themselves have reinforced that perspective as much as non-gamers.

How many gaming ads or gaming commercials begin with two boys (or these days men) sitting on a couch, with a stack of video games and snack foods around them? How many times does Hollywood or television feature a character stating that he's a slacker and plays video games?

Sure, Obama is perpetuating the whole "gamers are lazy" schtick, but he's not the one that's starting it, and it is not the crux of his message. Honestly, if you wanted to just win the point that he was badmouthing games, then congratulations! Now, please point it out the next 20,000 times its done as well and maybe we'll start scratching the surface.

I think it is being misread, I don't see a metaphor of underachievement. I see him saying that focus needs to be on education first, then you can get to your tv and video games.

I don't see any problem with that. He certainly didn't say anything about banning games.

He's not saying video games make you dumb, he's saying TOO many video games are the problem.

A little fun every once and a while is ok.

Why are people arguing over "what he meant"? No matter what Obama's INTENTIONS are, I fear the worst for our country.

Oh, sure, we may not get drafted into a war, but how many soldiers have to lose their jobs again?

@"Give obama a pas" Comment

I was saying this to illustrate the community's willingness to cut Obama some slack even though his position as given on common sense media is very similar to that of Clinton and Romney both of whom were lambasted here.

Again I'm not saying that either Clinton or Romney were right, but Obama is no better

@TRT-X
Obama has no qualms about stepping in: "But if the industry fails to act, then my administration would" He is cool with the idea, just like Romney and since Romney did not forward any legislation then the two are remarkably similar

Obama wasn't villifying games any more than he was villifying TV, on which many people were probably watching him speak. The issue is excess, as stated many times above. Hey, I'm a beer drinker, but I'm not going to take offense if someone is making an arguement about addressing a social ill and says "put the beer down."

@yowsers.... hopefully we can find the soldiers other jobs that aren't limited guarding the economic interests of large corporations in a foreign land, not to mention the whole being shot at and shooting at others thing.

Not so sure that a "it will be bad for the economy to stop the war" argument is all that relevant. I'm gonna say that for me personally death or disfigurement of both soldiers and civilians is a bit weightier than people not having jobs waging war.

It would be interesting to see Mr Obama discuss around research findings showing that Video games are contributing to children's mental development.

I'd like to see someone with the ability to read and reason write an article based on the very things they pasted into it. GP what sort of nonsense post is this? If you have political agenda to push just announce you support x candidate, no need to fabricate/lie to satisfy needs.

@xNoLaNx
You and those people who are making the same comments disgust me. This website is called GAMEPOLITICS. What does that mean? It means that they will report on goddamn near anything pertaining to video games. One such thing is what a front-runner presidential candidate thinks about video games. Obama said that in order to "instill a sense of excellence in our children" we must must turn off the TV and put video games away. Fair enough. This implies that video games and television have a detrimental effect on the education. That argument can be made. Fair enough. Therefore, I have little qualm with GP about making this claim. His speech implies that, without video games, kids would do better in school so it's a very reasonable conclusion to make that Obama has used video games as a metaphor for underachievement, and possibly that he does not like them.

So, you call GP both unreasonable, illiterate, and untrustworthy because they drew a conclusion about something that Obama said. Not only that, you claim that they have a political agenda. Who the hell does GP support? I think something negative about EVERY major candidate has been said on this site. This is the first time I've seen such outrage from people here, consequently on the first time Obama has been cast in a negative light.

@TRT-X
"Obama is merely recommending that parents take responsibility for their kids."
Fair enough. But I don't want the office of the president wasted on friendly parental advice.

"He is not saying “video games are bad for our children”. He’s saying “bad parents are bad for our children”."
Yes. He. Is. I remember him specifically asking parents to "put video games away." Granted, he was talking primarily about parenting, but the parent's function is to turn of TVs and video games. It is reasonable (again) to conclude that he does not like video games and considers them detrimental toward the education system.

Vote for Obama! Hillary Clinton won 11 states and Obama won 25! Yahoooooooooooo!

Personally, I look forward to the day when video games are so common it doesn't make an impression when someone important mentions them.

"Turn off the television set"? Why does Barack Obama hate television so much?!

And you thought politicians jumped to conclusions.

Actually we need to instill a sense of mediocrity in our children. Telling them every day that they can be the best, that they can do anything, that puts a lot of pressure on them to excel where they don't have to in order to lead a fulfilling life. SOMEONE has to be the clerk at the DMV, the school janitor, the road construction crew, ect.

That said, kids these days do spend way too much time indoors, but it's not just video gaming. The internet itself is a pretty serious culprit.

"Actually we need to instill a sense of mediocrity in our children. Telling them every day that they can be the best, that they can do anything, that puts a lot of pressure on them to excel where they don’t have to in order to lead a fulfilling life. SOMEONE has to be the clerk at the DMV, the school janitor, the road construction crew, ect."

QFT

Western society in general is putting far to much pressure on young people to get lots of academic qualifications, unless they are talented in sports, music or other "high profile" career possibilities. I remember, while I was growing up in the UK, I was pretty much thrown aside by my school because they did not think I would achieve academic excellence and I was no good at sports. Jobs such as fishing, mining, farming, construction, low level labour and admin work, are all considered "entry level" or "failure" jobs.

Sadly, in recent years, I have found two troubling situations resulting from this. Firstly, farmers and other low end employeers who either cannot get people to work for them for a wage they can afford to pay are employees illegal immigrants who tend to work harder and often take alot more pride in their work. Secondly, a fair number of chain stores and other "entry level" positions are only available to young people, and a college education has become a standard.. if you do not have one, or you are older than about 20, it is next to impossible to get a basic job.

I'm a member of the ECA, so naturally I'm up to fight against Anti-game statements. However, I do not find this offensive. He didn't say that games were causing us to become mindless killing machines, he just put them on the same level as television. And I'm ok with that. He's referring to the "comic book guy from the simpsons" kind of gamer. All that said, I do not in anyway support Obama. I disagree with him on almost all of the issues. I'm just pointing out that the statement is not a threat.

[...] In a recent article, GamePolitics reports on what they believe to be a recurring theme in senator Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. According to the blog, he uses video games as a “metaphor for underachievement.” As reported by the Washington Post, Obama said: I know how hard it will be to alleviate poverty that has built up over centuries, how hard it will be to fix schools, because changing our schools will require not just money, but a change in attitudes. [...]

I see the ObamaZombies are alive and well.

"No braaaaaaaaains..."

Well, I would have to agree partially. Video games breed apathy. He is not saying they are evil or bad. He is simply saying that parents need to step up and not let their kids play games on end, they will simply turn into vegetables and not do anything productive. One thing I LIKE, is the fact that he is putting the blame on the parents, not on the makers, or the players. If you think that you are NOT apathetic from playing to many video games you are lieing to your self. Instead of marathoning on 12 hours of video games on your day off, you could be doing positive things. Dont get me wrong, I'm a hardcore gamer, but what he says has a point, as long as it is more moderate as that crazy loon Hillary

You can agree or not, but it's a misreading of his statement to think that he's saying videogames are a problem. They're only a problem because kids aren't getting an education. He mentions them as something like TV, because they're POPULAR. It's not even that kids spend too much time with them...it's just that kids are spending all of their time being entertained, and not enough of their time being educated. It doesn't take a genius to understand this. What kind of site is this, and are the stories always this...off.

This article is irresponsible, and I look to GamePolitics to be a serious site. So I'm pretty dissappointed. This article is irresponsible because it doesn't just show what Obama said, it warps it with the title that sensationalizes Obama's statement.

I'm not an Obama supporter in the slightest, but I think GamePolitics is blowing that statement out of proportion.
I agree with everything said in that Obama quote above. I think many American kids need more discipline in their lives and part of that is less TV watching and gaming. He didn't equate playing video games with failure. I think he's saying parents have to teach, encourage, and enforce discipline and balance in their habits and behavior. Don't let your kids do whatever they want because it's easy.

I, too, have no problem with this.

I personally regret wasting a lot of my school life playing video games and wish I had gotten out more like I do now. I find it hard to play single player games alone, these days.

And again, he's telling parents to start parenting their kids and not ignore their children and let video games do the parenting. He's saying that it's time parents started watching their kids instead of blaming games.

I also don't have a problem with this. There ARE kids who need to turn off the tv and video games. Those are the people Obama is talking about here. I would be absolutely shocked if Obama didn't share the same rational opinion that I do: Video Games are a (lovely) form of entertainment, but are (in many cases) mindless entertainment and so should be had in moderation- especially by children. I don't think Obama has a problem with adults indulging in their legal right to enjoy themselves. He isn't attacking video games like Hilary does, he is attacking laziness, which *can* manifest itself as constant gaming.

He's not saying video games or TV is bad,instead he's just saying that too much of it is bad.Anything in excess is harmful,so I do agree with him.Hillary,on the other hand is a stupid technophobe who's probably too stupid to turn on an electric blanket...so her views on video games is more or less because she just doesn't understand technology because of her 1950's mindset.

Ya...wow, the fact that he correlates games and failure together is the dumbest thing I know. I'm a senior in high school and I love my video games. I get good grades and go to honors and advanced placement classes. I also love my sports and weightlifting is huge in my life. But if there was one thing I couldn't live without it would be my video games. Does that mean I'm a failure Obama? You just lost my vote.

I've noticed several people stating that the game rating system should provide more information to parents about the games. The rating system DOES provide a perfect amount of information. If parents are too stupid to turn the game box over and READ, why is it the ESRB's fault? Coupled with the fact that if a game is rated 'M', the children CANNOT BUY THEM! Parents, not the rating systen or the game companies, are to blame. READ THE BOX!

Obama in my opinion talks too much. All politicians just blabber without really saying anything. I believe that if your child is spending too much time playing games, yes, some regulation should be in place by the parent. But to say games should just be put away because they are a basis for underachievement is ignorant. Parents need to step up, but don't place blame purely on games. Kids spend time outside, watching TV, going with their friend's to movies, playing sports, etc. yet Obama breathes not a word against the other distracting activities.

http://www.cinemablend.com/games/NIU-Shooting-Lets-Thompson-Saber-Rattle...

"NIU Shooting Lets Thompson Saber Rattle"

"Fortunately, the rest of the world has scoffed at Thompson this time around and places like GamePolitics.com are forced to find imaginary enemies again by reading too much into Barack Obama’s statements promoting change and responsibility “We’re going to have to parent better, and turn off the television set, and put the video games away, and instill a sense of excellence in our children, and that’s going to take some time.” It’s more important to counter-point the violence argument than it is to attack someone who indirectly and inadvertently intimated that gamers are lazy. "

OUCH!

Nightwng2000
NW2K Software

[...] February 21, 2008 by glennw Okay . . . I know that other issues may seem more important. You know, the trillions being spent in Iraq, the economy here in the US, rising health care costs and steroids in baseball. But according to GamePolitics.com, what we really should be concerned with is Barack Obama’s view of video games. “His speeches, however, often contain a reference to parents making their children ‘put away the video games.’ For Obama, video games seem to serve as a sort of metaphor for underachievement. The Illinois senator repeated the theme last night in a victory speech following his big win over Clinton in the Wisconsin primary.” [...]

Wow. I think you're way off base here Dennis.
He's calling video games a hobby. Placing them in proper perspective.

Are you prepared to argue that NOT limiting video games and television is good parenting!??!

If Obama said something like "Put away the Nintendo", does that make him an anti-Nintendo fanboy? Nope, it is usually a household example term for video games in general. As such, saying video games is just being used as an example in a different context.

can you guys imagine a former videogame developer runing for president?? how F&*^ %^ would that be... a score in the gaming community..

oh by the way i m still voting for obama, he's more understanding and reasonable than the other candidates....

It is a form of underachievement - just like films are. That's the reason they're games: an enjoyable activity you can use to fill in space when you're not working.

Reaching lvl 70 and getting epic armour in WoW might feel like you've done something, but it hasn't improved your social/economic situation. Though the monies you expend continues to hold up the game market, and that's always a good thing.

another case of blaming the thing itself for the negative effects it is causing

"oh i didnt getta job as i was trying to finish Metal Gear Solid 4"
"oh, the console/game made me to not do it!" or,
"tv/console made me miss my interview/class!"

nah its all about being RESPONSIBLE for yer own actions & decisions or yer hobby for that matter

i mean, you could list down every negative effects that any particular thing would have on you, but in the end, it will still depend on yer own decision if you would LET that happen

so unless game consoles come with the effects of heroine or crack, then the only thing to blame here is the person and/or his own sense of responsibility, not the thing or the hobby itself

.

.

This is retarded.

He's criticizing PARENTS, not video games. He's just mentioning video games ALONGSIDE TVs.

Talk about blowing things out of proportion.

Pathetic.

.

.
.

.

Well, I think, too, this needs to be considered in the context of parenting. I do not see this as "video games are bad/tv is bad" -- these things are bad when they become substitutes for parenting, which happens all too often. Don't want to spend quality time with your child? Buy him/her a video game to occupy the time...varying and quality parent-child interaction is important. I tend to see this as the central theme (parenting) rather than the focus being video games in and of themselves.

http://news.filefront.com/obama-sees-gamers-as-underachievers/

I WOULD HOPE YOU WILL reconsider and let video games stay around so plz listen to me

i think Corey Sutchagay has lost his mind and he should be quiet but i love video games. Corey keep ur mouth SHUT

[...] Even Obama used gaming in a derogative way in his campaign, I think its become too easy now to just blame games and the gaming industry for anything you please, so next time you step on dog  on the street you now know who to blame! [...]

[...] Op GamePolitics las ik een interessante posting over Obama die zich mengt in de discussie over videogames. Normaal gezien lijken politici zich er altijd erg gemakkelijk vanaf te maken en maar wat te roepen. De meest geziene reflex is dat videogames slecht zijn en verboden moeten worden. Nu lijkt het erop dat Obama wat genuanceerder tegen deze zaken aankijkt en een beroep doet op de verantwoordelijkheid van ouders in het geheel. [...]

Although as a gamer I find this incredibly tactless and tasteless, he doesn't seem to be a wingnut like Thompson who wants them banned. I think he is using video games as a ploy to gain votes from parents and the elderly because most of them still think that games and gamers are mindless instead of seeing them for the works of art they are, and gamers as the thinking people of this generation. Shameless, but it will probably always work until the parents-who-are-gamers demographic doubles again.

All in all, I'm not worried because even though politicians love to slam games, they know dang well they can't do anything about an industiry that rakes in money the way it does. Thats why I love capitalism, "It makes money, therefore it is."

I'm all for freedom of ttnet vitamin speech and allowing rent a car game makers to put whatever they want in games, but there's one thing about this app that has me scratching my head.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but from araç kiralama the previous article araba kiralama on this I gathered that players can use Google maps in-game to find the other (real-life?) dealers in their area.  If this is the case, has travesti anyone considered what's stopping someone from using this app to actually move drugs between hands for reals?

But majority araba kiralama of their outrage araç kiralama stems from what it could DO TO children, not the content itself.  Talk to one of these people and you'll find they don't think any books kiralık araba should be banned from children.  Mention American Psycho and they talk about kiralık araç the redeeming value of using imagination to construct a story.  Reading, no matter what the content, is largely viewed as a consequenceless activity for people of any age.  The reason why I mention American Psycho is because of the content itself.  Gaming never has and likely never will have any scenes where someone has sex with a severed head.  Not gonna happen.  Yet despite this, they'll fight tooth and nail to protect their children from two boys kissing in Bully but whatever they read is harmless... yeah.

The entire arguement is kiralık oto based upon a social normality inflicted by luddites who can't figure out the controls for Halo so it's frightening and terrifying and obviously the cause of youth violence on the rise even though, in reality, it's in decline (which is actually a HUGE suprise given minibüs kiralama the economies status).  In  a perfect world, we would have parents that actually parent.  The idea of sales restrictions on media on oto kiralama any form to accomidate parental unwillingness to get involved with their child's life is the real problem to me.  Here I am, 32 years old, and being held up at a self-scan rent a car needing to show ID before I can buy a $10 M rated game all because Soccer Momthra can't be bothered to look at the crap Billy Genericallystupidson does in his free time.  It's too hard for her, so I have to suffer?