Apparently, contrary to what I’ve been reading, this is not the first time a President has put together a speech for the kiddies.
George H.W. Bush did it in 1991 (as one of our contributors alluded to earlier in the comments).
Democrats, predictably, were outrageously outraged.
“The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students,” House Majority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) said. “And the president should be doing more about education than saying, ‘Lights, camera, action.’ “Rep. Patricia Schroeder (D-Colo.), chairwoman of the Select Committee on Children, Youth and Families, said it was outrageous for the White House to “start using precious dollars for campaigns” when “we are struggling for every silly dime we can get” for education programs.
Presumably, Gephardt and Crying Pat Schroeder are just as outraged today.
I knew that I read somewhere that this was “the first speech of its kind” or something along those lines, but I couldn’t remember where.
After searching, I came across the text of the letter that Arne Duncan, Education Secretary, sent to school principals a few weeks ago, which used to be on the ED website, but isn’t anymore. (Full text here and here.)
This is the first time an American president has spoken directly to the nation’s school children about persisting and succeeding in school. We encourage you to use this historic moment to help your students get focused and begin the school year strong. I encourage you, your teachers, and students to join me in watching the President deliver this address on Tuesday, September 8, 2009. It will be broadcast live on the White House website www.whitehouse.gov 12:00 noon eastern standard time.
Emphasis mine.
Bush’s speech didn’t count. #1, because he’s a Republican, and they are evil. And #2, because it had a different theme.
The speech at Alice Deal Junior High School, broadcast live on radio and television, urged students to study hard, avoid drugs and turn in troublemakers.
As for the claim that the Obama speech will be innocuous and non-political, I think even a casual read of Duncan’s letter pretty much blows that theory away.
Since taking office, the President has repeatedly focused on education, even as the country faces two wars, the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression and major challenges on issues like energy and health care. The President believes that education is a critical part of building a new foundation for the American economy.
Yeah, nothing political about that at all.
Subscribe / RSS
Actually, the 1991 speech is not the speech I was referring to (I don’t recall having to watch that one). The one I was thinking of, was the 1989 speech. That speech was political in nature.
H.W. was attempting to push a new drug bill through Congress. The new bill was a tough and useless anti-drug program that contained funding for more prisons, prosecutors and other strong-arm tactics that do not work. Democrats wanted to add in funding for drug treatment and prevention to the bill (oh noes! socialism!!1!).
The thing that really made this unique was that H.W. had already given a national address the week before, even going so far as to set up a visual aid: a DEA crack bust in a neighborhood near the White House.
Linkey no workey.
What Duncan meant was, "This is the first time an AFRICAN American president has spoken directly to the nation’s school children about persisting and succeeding in school."
Typical…Link 1…Link 2…and a new link (my favorite so far, though not an example of a national address).
Tom: I believe the kosher term is 'Halfrican'.