Obama Available as Commencement Speaker

Oh, No. He's doing it again. President Obama wants to talk to some more students.

The president wants America to, once again, lead the nations of the world in the percentage of college graduates - and he's willing to show up at your high school school to prove it.

Let's hope Kentucky Republican Party Chair Steve Robertson and radio talk show host Leland Conway don't find out about his latest plot to turn us all into productive, well-educated citizens.

Attention Steve and Leland: Another politician is after your kids and this one wants them to read !

Steve Robertson, chairman of the Republican Party of Kentucky and WLAP 630-AM's conservative pundit Leland Conway recently warned Kentucky parents of the dangers of allowing school children to listen to the president of the United States.

Robertson said Obama's desire to speak directly to America's schoolchildren is "very concerning and kind of creepy." Robertson said the speech was an effort on behalf of the president "to circumvent parents" and "gain direct access to our children."

Conway said on his radio program that he would "applaud any parent" who kept their children home.

Naturally, I thought they were both full of it.

But maybe not.

Now comes yet another politician sending subtle socialist messages to our students. He wants them all to read.

...for our collective good, one supposes.

Where President Obama urged responsible behavior on the part of students, this junior congressman is showing up in state libraries and he apparently wants to issue commands to our sweet little children: Read.

And what would he have them read? Why it's a biography of Republican President Theodore Roosevelt. Another closet commie, no doubt ! Tune in tomorrow to hear what Leland has to say about this.

Where will it end?

Tempest in a Teacup: Plus, Robertson and Conway Agree, Everybody Else was the Problem.

President Barack Obama delivered his much debated, nationally televised/webcast speech this afternoon and one wonders in retrospect what all the fuss was about.

Hat tip to the Detroit Free Press:

Among Obama's most vocal critics was Florida Republican Party Chair Jim Greer who claimed to be appalled that taxpayer dollars were being used "to spread President Obama's socialist ideology." And he's from Florida ! where American taxpayers have spent tons of money on bailouts of Florida's decimated real estate market and on Florida banks. A large percentage of Florida's population depends on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid - yet Greer denounces socialism? Any chance the rest of us can get that money back?

But it turns out Greer was only scoring political points and he wasn't so principled after all.

The Reaction

This from The Guardian:

Schools across the US went ahead with a boycott of a broadcast by President Barack Obama today in spite of many rightwing critics rowing back at the last minute from a campaign accusing him of socialist indoctrination...

Having seen the advance copy, some of the most vocal critics such as Jim Greer, the Republican party chairman in Florida, who had accused Obama of trying to spread "socialist ideology", backed off. Greer said: "It's a good speech. It encourages kids to stay in school and the importance of education."

The call for the boycott was started by rightwing television and radio commentators.

There was a slight embarrassment on the part of mainstream Republicans, who initially joined in but were today distancing themselves. Among Republicans supportive of Obama's right to make the speech were Newt Gingrich, the Republican former House speaker, who told NBC that there were other presidents had established such a precedent. "President Reagan did it, President [George] HW Bush did it … It's a good speech, I recommend it to everybody if you have any doubts."

This from the Wall Street Journal:

Obama Address: A Tempest in a Teacup

This from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

Obama Spoke. Nobody Died.

...I talked to many media colleagues about the rancor toward the Obama school address and none of us could remember anything similar when we covered members of Congress or senators speaking to school groups. National political candidates have even spoken to local high schools with none of these accusations of indoctrination or political posturing. Indeed, some rock groups have gone into schools without objection....

Meanwhile on WLAP,

Leland talks with the Chairman of the KY GOP, Steve Robertson & former Lexington Public School Principal Richard Day about Obama's Speech to school kids.

I essentially said,

By turning an innocuous little message encouraging students to do well in school - something we can all agree on - into a communist plot, the Republican’s have effectively scored political points – at the same time President Obama does something we should all admire.

I must assume political points is all you were after…because it’s hard for me to imagine you were really concerned that some mass hypnosis was about to overtake our school children.

I mean, it makes for good radio chat fodder…but...If your kid can’t listen to a 20-minute message from the president of the United States about working hard in school – without being galvanized into unbridled communism – then you’re just not doing your job as a parent.

I argued that the use of the word creepy - lowered the political discourse and was pleased to hear him segue to the word "odd."

In American democracy If we don’t show some level of personal respect for each other then we can’t debate the issues. It becomes more about personalities and less about objective facts.

In his conversation with Conway, Robertson said,

"I don't have a problem with an American president addressing students about the importance of staying in school and working hard" but I do have a problem with the Department of Education...preparing a curriculum with an Obama focus. ... focus "was to raise awareness of Obama as an individual" ...

Conway: "One blog in particular accused both you and I of taking this term creepy, and they were saying that denoted pedophilia ... That thought, personally, never crossed my mind. Creepy, to me is a statement that is universally used when you have a vague sense of distrust"...

"That's why I used the word. I don't know exactly why you did because it's just by chance that we both used the same word."

Robertson: "Well it certainly is, and I guess that shows great minds think alike. I read that blog as well, and you know, a haunted house is also creepy. And you know, I found it odd that the Herald-Leader through their editorial board... seemed to take their entire premise for that editorial piece out of that blog that you mentioned." But you know it's really discouraging, when you try and involve parents in the education of their children, and you try and have a public dialogue, that institutions like the Herald-Leader and their liberal editorial board have to run to racism; have to run to assertions of pedophilia, which I find creepy... and that anyone that disagrees politically is assassinated publicly

Conway: The message I'd like to send out to people is don't back down because if you back down, this kind of crap wins....

So let's get this straight. Robertson's original statement in the Herald-Leader went like this:

[The] Chairman of the Republican Party of Kentucky, said Obama's desire to speak directly to America's schoolchildren is "very concerning and kind of creepy." Robertson said the speech was an effort on behalf of the president "to circumvent parents" and "gain direct access to our children."

And now he would have us believe what he really meant was creepy....like a haunted house?! ...because he was only trying to get parents involved in their children's schools?!

Readers can judge that for themselves, but my BS meter went off.

Of course, there is still the problem of the Herald-Leader lying to us all the time. How can we trust the news reporting of a paper with such a biased editorial board? This became an issue recently when I picked up H-L's reporting of Conway's on-air comments and wrote, "Conway advised parents to keep their children at home." Amy Wilson originally reported,

Originally, Conway said, he advised concerned listeners to either take their children out of school and read the Constitution to them instead or attend school with them that day and watch what teachers did "because it's important for parents to know what goes on in the schools."

Conway denied saying it and asked KSN&C to correct it's reporting, so we posted everyone's comments for the reader's to judge. But on Labor Day Monday, Conway was not on the air live. Rather, WLAP replayed his original broadcast from their "best of" series and I got to hear his comments for myself.

Conway very clearly said he would "applaud any parent" who kept their children home. Go to the tape. It's there.

Turns out the Herald-Leader news reporting was accurate.

We've Got Mail

I picked up a note from WLAP's Leland Conway on Facebook this morning asking for a correction on my recent "Robertson and Conway: Giving Conservatism a Bad Name" piece.

I had written,

"Conway and Robertson are concerned that such an event might bring partisan politics into the schoolhouse, so they decided to politicize the event. Conway advised parents to keep their children at home."

I based my statement on a Herald-Leader report, that

Originally, Conway said, he advised concerned listeners to either take their children out of school and read the Constitution to them instead or attend school with them that day and watch what teachers did "because it's important for parents to know what goes on in the schools."

Then from Conway, this congenial note:

"I hope this email finds you well. I was writing to see if you would please correct an attribution you made to me in your column. I did not recommend people keep their children home. In fact, I recommended that they go to school with thier [sic] children and participate in the process. I did say, however, that I am supportive of parents rights and would support any parent's decision not to have their child participate."

Readers can judge if I got it wrong, based on H-L's report. But since I wasn't listening at the time whatever comments were made, I'll take Conway at his word.

Then he invited me on his program, WLAP-630's The Pulse (3-6pm)...for a spanking one supposes.

That will depend on how much work I can get done this weekend...but for today, it's a road trip to Cincinnati to support the CATS.

C-J Smacks Holliday; H-L Channels KSN&C; Obama not the First; WH to release text; Other reactions

This from the Courier-Journal:

A bad decision

In our hyper-heated political times, this inspirational talk is being turned into a major controversy, with some parents demanding that their children not be subjected to the President's message.

How sad it is that we have come to the point in this country where the President of all the people cannot talk to children about taking responsibility and working hard. Could the outrageous demonstrations of hate and prevarication that have dominated health care forums this summer now move to the schoolroom?

Kentucky Education Commissioner Terry Holliday has knuckled under to parental requests and told school officials that they must provide alternative activities for children of the objectors. This isn't just sad; it's outrageous.

The President of the United States — be he Barack Obama, Dwight Eisenhower or Theodore Roosevelt — ought to be able to speak words of encouragement to young people without being subject to parental censorship. Have we become so splintered in this nation that we can't unite over something as fundamental as the subject Mr. Obama will discuss? We hope Mr. Holliday has the good sense to reverse this bad decision.

This from the Herald-Leader:

Message from the president

The president of the United States will urge the nation's youth to work hard in school, set educational goals and take responsibility for their learning.

Unless you're getting a paycheck from the Republican Party or for trashing Barack Obama, there's no reason to see anything sinister about this.

If anything, Obama should be thanked for using his bully pulpit and popularity with youth to communicate the value of education and persistence.

The right-wing backlash speaks volumes about Obama's detractors. The ranters are wound up after a season of red-faced anger, lies about health care and guns displayed at public events.

They go beyond the pale, though, by saying the nation's children need protection from our president's words.

What do they fear? That in a 15-minute speech Obama can hypnotize the nation's youth into forgetting everything their parents ever taught them and ... what? Do their homework?

It's especially repugnant that Kentucky Republican Party chairman Steve Robertson uses imagery associated with pedophilia — "circumvent parents . . . gain direct access to our children . . . creepy" — to demonize Obama. Robertson plays on the fear of black men, an old and ugly racial stereotype, and he should be ashamed...

Susan weighs in at Prichard:

The president and the children

I wish President Reagan had thought of an annual opening message and every president since had followed his example. It is not just an opportunity for a president can give voice to our shared national respect for education. It's an opportunity for the students to experience our shared national respect for the leaders chosen through our democratic process, including those for whom we (or our parents) did not vote.

Turns out...Reagan did. So we should shine a little light on this from PolitiFact:

Barack Obama is not the first president to address school children.

Secretary of Education Arne Duncan urged the nation's principals to allow their students to watch a Sept. 8 address on the importance of education from President Barack Obama...

We rated that claim Pants on Fire! ...

President George H.W. Bush gave an address to schools nationwide in 1991, from a junior high school in Washington, D.C. News reports from the time said the White House hoped that the address would be shown at schools nationwide, and Bush began his remarks by saying he was talking to "millions" of students "in classrooms all across the country."

You can read Bush's complete remarks via the Web site of his presidential library...

You may have guessed this already, but news reports from the time indicate that Democrats criticized Bush for giving the speech.

"The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students," said Rep. Richard Gephardt, then the Democratic majority leader in the House of Representatives."And the president should be doing more about education than saying, 'Lights, camera, action.'" ...

Republicans, though, defended the right of the president to address students. "Why is it political for the president of the United States to discuss education?" asked Newt Gingrich, who was then the House Republican whip. "It was done at a nonpolitical site and was beamed to a nonpolitical audience. . . . They wanted to reach the maximum audience with the maximum effect to improve education." ...

We also found that Ronald Reagan took questions from high school students at the White House in 1986, and the question-and-answer session was broadcast nationally.

Reagan urged the students to stay in school and say no to drugs, but he also discussed overtly political matters, such as national defense funding, nuclear disarmament and -- in suprising policy detail -- taxes. (Read Reagan's complete remarks.)

This from Politics K-12:

Flap Continues: Rep. John Kline Asks Obama to Release His Remarks

Rep. John Kline, the top Republican on the House Education and Labor Committee, sent a letter to the White House asking President Barack Obama to publicly release the text of his back-to-school address to kids, to be delivered next week. (According to this Washington Post story, Obama already had planned to do just that). UPDATE: And indeed, the White House said today that the text of the speech will be available on Monday at whitehouse.gov.

As you may know, some Texas districts have expressed qualms about letting kids listen, because of language in one of the lesson plans accompanying the speech that gave students suggestions for how they could "help" the president, prompting claims that the speech would politically indoctrinate kids...

And this from Justin at EdJurist:

The President's Speech to Students and the Craziness that Ensued

Okay ... approaching the edge of sanity today with the public outcry against the President's upcoming address to students returning to school. This whole thing, the politicization of this event by some, makes me a little sick to my stomach....the common trend I am seeing from administrators today is to a) either don't interrupt the schedule for it, or b) allow students to opt out. I am seeing some administrators on the various listservs I belong to requiring their students to see it - and I commend them for it - but they are the exception. The safe route here is to permit students to opt out. In fact, the new Commissioner here in KY has said that schools need to "provide alternatives." So, as long as you are providing an alternative (hello, study hall) to students or parents that are on the edge of the deep end, then you school administrators should be fine.

This, too, shall pass.

There was plenty of reaction in letters section of the Herald-Leader as well.

This from Jeff Worley in H-L:

Incited perhaps by WLAP 630-AM's conservative talk-jock Leland Conway, who called such a direct address to students "creepy," 25 to 50 parents phoned the Fayette County school district to complain about the president's noontime Tuesday speech to their kids. What are these parents afraid of?

Kentucky GOP chief Steve Robertson knows: The talk is an effort by Obama "to circumvent parents" and "gain direct access to our children."

Yes. Can't you just hear the president now (in a sonorous, hypnotic tone): "Now you kids be sure when you go home tonight to tell your mommies and daddies to support Uncle Obama's health-care plan, OK?"

Fueled by unfounded fear, parents who refuse to allow their kids to view this presidential talk are depriving their children of an exciting, unique and historical event.

This from Dave Woods:

Please tell me that the reporter incorrectly quoted Steve Robertson, Kentucky GOP chair, in the Thursday article regarding President Barack Obama's speech to the nation's children.

Having been an educator for 30-plus years in Kentucky, I am starting to realize why some children come to school with unfounded fears, prejudice and a reluctance to think thoughts other than what has been said to them by authoritative figures in their young lives.

"Kind of scary," an effort "to circumvent parents," and "gain direct access to our children" are statements that frighten me in relation to the president of the United States speaking to children.

Please have Robertson announce the candidates he is endorsing so I can vote for the opponents!

And from Tom Ringley:

So, it appears that the official Republican talking-points word for President Barack Obama's address to schoolchildren is "creepy."

You have to hand it to them. Republicans may despise every good and decent thing this country has ever stood for, but they have the best message discipline of anyone since the American Communist Party of the 1930s and 1940s.

And Dan Wu knows satire:

I couldn't agree more with Steve Robertson of the state GOP and talk-show host Leland Conway. An adult speaking directly to children without their parents present is very creepy. This is why I attend school everyday with my daughter; that way she's never alone with other adults trying to educate her.

As for the content of President Barack Obama's speech, I happen to have a copy of the agenda right here so parents can decide if they want their kids exposed to it.

Barack Hussein Obama will begin the broadcast with a reading from the Koran, followed by a visual lesson on gay marriage using two Ken dolls. Then he will decree a ban on slingshots and water guns then institute a tax on milk and Tater Tots. He will then conclude with a singalong to the socialist anthem The Internationale.

As you can see, conservatives' fears are well founded, as always.

Apologies for the fonts. I used Firefox on this post. It's a lot easier than IE is some ways but I'm having real difficulty controlling the font sizes.

Warning: A scary black man is coming to school and he wants to seduce your children.

Robertson and Conway: Giving Conservatism a Bad Name

In the early 1990’s, then US Congressman Larry Hopkins came to Cassidy School to speak to Marcia Foster’s second grade class. It never occurred to me to ask parents if they wanted their children to be excused from the event.

We were teaching children about our democratic form of government. That Hopkins was a Republican and the principal was a Democrat mattered not at all. He was our duly elected representative; he was there for all children; and we were honored. Parents came too and brought treats for the children.

It was a memorable visit. Like a grandfather on career day, he talked about his job and how important it was for every child to work hard in school. I’ll never forget that as Hopkins unfurled his gift to the school - a flag that had flown over our nation’s capital - a child “got sick” all over it. Old Glory saved Hopkins from tragedy. Hopkins’s aide was horrified. Hopkins was amused. I went to the laundry. That’s just life in the school business.

We flew that flag until it wore out.

For a number of years, during the Clinton and Bush (43) administrations, it was my privilege as principal to read a letter from those presidents to our “graduating” fifth graders as we awarded the President’s Academic Fitness Awards. Both extolled the virtues of education, reinforced the notion that hard work led to a prosperous America, and generally challenged students to go on to success in high school, college and in life. It never occurred to me to censor the letters in any way. They were messages from our president. Neither acted politically.

Since 2004, Secretary of State Trey Grayson has held 11 regional summits with hundreds of students and teachers arguing that Kentucky must “increase the civic literacy of our people.” Like Thomas Jefferson, Grayson believes that “civic engagement is essential to the success of a democratic government." Grayson's advocacy is not partisan. It is not meant to stifle speech. It is fundamentally American.

Now comes word that for the first time in history, President Barack Obama will conduct a televised/webcast address to America’s school children, at noon, on Tuesday September 8. The White House says, “the president will speak directly to the nation’s children and youth about persisting and succeeding in school. The president will challenge students to work hard, set educational goals, and take responsibility for their learning.” The chat will be broadcast live on the White House Web site and on C-SPAN.

Suddenly alarms are sounding on the far right.

It is unclear who called whom, but both Steve Robertson, chairman of the Republican Party of Kentucky and WLAP 630-AM's conservative pundit Leland Conway called the president’s planned address “creepy.”

Conway and Robertson are concerned that such an event might bring partisan politics into the schoolhouse, so they decided to politicize the event. Conway advised parents to keep their children at home.

But what is truly outrageous here is their use of the word “creepy” to describe the address – imagery that is clearly intended to besmirch Obama in a personal, undeserved and vicious manner. By using language befitting a pedophile or some other depraved individual who might prey on children, Robertson and Conway have fabricated an illusion of the president that is totally without merit.

Moreover it is troubling that Conway - (H-L, 10/6/08) who has argued that there is little racism in Kentucky because you can’t prove otherwise - should evoke such fears about our first African American president harkens back to the Jim Crow days when white populist politicians stirred concerns over miscegenation – as if Obama is coming to despoil our children. This is outrageous.

Robertson and Conway should be ashamed of themselves – but I doubt they are.

There is, indeed, something creepy going on here. But it is not the president of the United States publicly addressing America’s school children. It is the depths to which the neocon wing of the Republican Party and reactionary radio pundits are willing to stoop in order to engender fear and widen the political divide.


This from the Herald-Leader, Photo by Charles Dharapak/AP:

Should kids hear Obama?

Plans by President Barack Obama to speak directly to the nation's schoolchildren Tuesday are sparking controversy in Kentucky.

Fayette County parents will receive a note from Superintendent Stu Silberman on Thursday explaining that the district will participate in the president's address and that parents can call the school if they have concerns. Parents can ask to have their children opt out of the planned noontime speech, and an alternative assignment will be arranged, provided that plans are made ahead of schedule. Other schools in the Bluegrass are following suit.

There were "between 25 and 50 calls" Tuesday and Wednesday to the Fayette County school district, according to Silberman. "We want to respect the office of the president and to respect parents as well," said Silberman. "We want this to be a good event."

Silberman said there are no plans for any discussions after the speech...

This from the Courier-Journal:

Holliday says schools should provide

alternative to Obama speech

Kentucky’s education chief told school superintendents Thursday that if they show President Obama’s coming address to students, they should provide alternative activities for children whose parents object.

Some districts “have received requests for alternative activities from parents who do not wish their children to view the broadcast or webcast,” education commissioner Terry Holliday said in an e-mail.

Here are the scary remarks Obama made yesterday while visiting a charter school in Washington:

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
AFTER READING TO THE SECOND GRADE CLASS
Capital City Public Charter School
Washington, D.C.
February 3, 2009

THE PRESIDENT: Well, listen, you guys, you've been terrific. Thank you so much for your hospitality --

MRS. OBAMA: -- your good questions.

THE PRESIDENT: -- your excellent questions.

MRS. OBAMA: -- your outstanding listening skills.

THE PRESIDENT: You're excellent listeners. And the reason we came to visit, A, we wanted to get out of the White House; B, we wanted to see you guys; but C, the other thing we wanted to tell everybody is that this kind of innovative school, the outstanding work that's being done here by the entire staff, and the parents who are so active and involved, is an example of how all our schools should be.

And what I've asked Arne Duncan to do is to make sure that he works as hard as he can over the next several years to make sure that we're reforming our schools, that we're rewarding innovation the way that it's taking place here, that we're encouraging parents to be involved, that we're raising standards for all children so that everybody can learn -- especially things like math and science that are going to be so important for the jobs of the future.

And so we're very proud of what's been accomplished at this school and we want to make sure that we're duplicating that success all across the country. So nothing is going to be more important than this. And the recovery and reinvestment act that we've put forward will provide billions of dollars to build schools and help with school construction. It will provide money to train teachers, especially in subjects like math and science that are so critical. And it will also give Secretary Duncan the resources he needs to reward excellent, innovative schools. And so we think it's really important for the country that we get that bill passed.

But thank you so much, everybody. Appreciate you.

MRS. OBAMA: Thank you, guys. This was fun. (Applause.)