Obama in the Classroom
By Anthony Gregory • Tuesday September 8, 2009 12:10 PM PDT • 5 Comments
Many of the biggest critics of Obama’s address to the nation’s public school students today backed off at the last minute. Newt Gingrich, Laura Bush and Jim Greer ultimately endorsed the speech, with Gingrich pointing out that Republican presidents have done similar things before.
Apparently, the critique for many was that Obama would try to push a leftist socialist message in his talk. Once it was discovered to be a generic “stay-in-school” kind of message, many conservatives flip-flopped and urged people to listen to it.
But of course, the real problem remains. Why did the president address the nation’s public schools? Why are the national government and especially the presidency seen as relevant institutions for education nationwide? It is troubling that so many would come out to support such a speech simply because the overt, controversial statist elements did not come through as expected, leaving intact the more generally accepted nationalist statist indoctrination we can expect from the public schools on a daily basis.
Tags: Uncategorized 
I read the speech’s content, which is not a real issue for me. Like you I don’t like the hidden lesson – the federal government has no proper role in education. In a free society, the nation’s political leaders don’t appeal to the children to get them on board. That’s what tyrants of authoritarian regimes do -via the state-run education, with state approved curriculum, raising little statists – not leaders of semi-free societies. Obama’s (or any president’s) speech is just another small brick in the wall. My main objection is the compulsory state system in general, with it’s lessons of dependency and obedience, all “for our own good.” A subtle example is in two of Obama’s last statements, “Your families, your teachers and I are doing everything we can to make sure you have the education you need to answer these questions” (about the children’s future). “I’m working hard to fix up your classrooms and get you the books, equipment and computers you need to learn.”
So…those who don’t support Obama, the teachers unions or public education in general don’t support the children, right? And it is the job of the president to oversee education, and the government to fund it and control it, right?
Schools supported by government are a serious mistake in a free society and are dangerous to that society’s long-term health. Many of our citizens value freedom so lightly that they appear willing to give it up for an illusion of security and the impossible promise of their needs somehow being met without real cost. Many have been bored and conditioned by 13 years of government schooling to accept authority without reason, to believe that without gov’t schools they would not know “what they were supposed to know”, that there would be no education for “the masses”, illiterate idiots would be rioting in the streets; Satanic and neo-Nazi cults would rule, and people would be learning the “wrong things.” They would not be “tested by the state” and follow the “state approved standards.” Horrors!
My vision of separation of school and state is brighter – true “diversity” – not just the politically correct kind, tons of innovative and effective educational choices springing up to suit all kinds, and lots more independent and inventive types of thought going on. Yes, there would be “weirdos” and things I don’t like, but that’s the cost of freedom. The law would be there to protect children as it does now – imperfectly, but the mechanism is there if real intervention is needed, for all of us wondering what the weirdos next door would be doing to their poor children without state schools to report to every day.
Public schools consume some 10 to 12K per student per year – much more when you consider all the peripheral costs – all the school bonds for buildings,etc. Even at the lowest figure of 10K, a K-12 education costs some $130K – an absurd amount when I know by experience it is easy to learn for very little or almost nothing per year if you have some books to read, a library card, access to the internet,and make an effort to find mentors/friends to learn from/with and form your own little co-op. I’m forking out the big bucks now on graduate school, but all of the basics can be learned on the cheap. Just think what all those $ could buy in all kinds of learning and doing if it was set free....
Peggy Christensen | Sep 8, 2009 | Reply
Ohmigosh Peggy, where have you been all my life, and can I hear more of your marvelous mind’s ideas over dinner this evening!?!
Mark Gilles | Sep 9, 2009 | Reply
Incredible.
Steve Wehrly | Sep 9, 2009 | Reply
The susceptibility of succumbing to prevailing agendas in the White House (at any time) is the wrong, and very possibly slippery slope, that our public schools chance when they open the door to influence from Washington. The President seriously misspoke when he said HE was working to provide books and computers. He does not do that, nor is it his responsibility. In this specific case, President Obama addressing public school classes is wholly inappropriate and insinuates his “organizer” approach into his message. Does he have nothing more important to do with his time than walk a very thin line on indoctrination. I believe we are faced with two very threatening nations, Iran and North Korea, at present. With Ahmadinejad making nice with Chavez, we should be very concerned about our national security and not so much with telling students to do their homework. I believe that responsibility belongs to their parents!
Pamela Gordon | Sep 9, 2009 | Reply
Big deal... I went to public schools, and guess what... by and large, my moral compass was set and tuned by my mother and father, not by any of my teachers. Did all the folks who posted a comment about this topic go to private school? Or were home schooled? Did going to a public school somehow prevent you from becoming a Libertarian or Independent? Did it prevent you from having free thoughts of your own? I doubt it.
If my kids ever have any questions about what any of their teachers said, they ask me. I don’t care whether your kids go to public schools or private or faith-based, you don’t control every aspect of what is taught unless you home school your kids yourself. Outside of that, you have to stay involved, and find out what they’re learning.
Why did the Prez address the schools? Because he’s the elected leader of this country, and he has a SHARED responsibility to set a tone in regards to education. I don’t care much for his stances on gun control, etc, but Obama’s message in regards to education has pretty much always been about staying in school and getting an education. I don’t see what issues anyone could have with that message. Those folks bitching about George H.W. Bush’s talk to school kids way back when were just as idiotic as the morons today blasting Obama.
Lest we forget, public school education has always been one of society’s great equalizers. I know that as the son of poor immigrants who both worked 12 hrs a day just to put food on the table, my public school education was an incredible blessing for them. My mother never got past elementary school because her family in China was poor, and could never afford to send her to further schooling. The public school system give my family, and all other poor families in America opportunities that we never could have had otherwise. It has been an absolute lifeline in lifting my generation from the poor, hard-scrabble existence of my parents lives.
It saddens me when I see folks looking for any opportunity to nit-pick, to tear down something that is imperfect, but absolutely essential to millions of your fellow citizens. The failures associated with our educational institutions are not the failures of the schools, private, public, or otherwise, though they do play a hand... Ultimately, the failures are the failures of parents.
To this old Air Force veteran, imperfect as they are, our public school systems are a part of our national character, and a weapon against our enemies who rely on fear, ignorance, and illiteracy to control their population.
John L | Sep 10, 2009 | Reply