Did Anyone Freak Out in '91 When George H.W. Bush Asked School Children to 'Help Us Achieve Our Goals'?

"That may take some time"

.11 seconds via Google News. Time, WaPo, MSNBC, Scripps News Service et al. ran the Gephardt quote. He said it. He said it about Bush. The end.

Mr. Beiler, I too saw the Washington Examiner piece and like vp123 says, if this is true - and as a writer/reporter it is your job to check it out - then you need to offer an apology. i get frustrated with this era of moral equivalency which I hear all the time in our home - "Well he did it to me, so I did it to him." This is what passes for journalism and reporting and politics today, not substantive debate. And Mr. Beiler, please apologize for the final line of your piece. It violates all 3 of the comment codes of conduct named just below your article (or is that just for us who read the articles?). I agree that this Obama speech to the kids - mine included - is no big deal. Your article hurts far more than it helps the debate.

Since you mentioned the "thug fringe" and their "paranoid dystopian fantasies", what's your take on 9-11 Truther and "Green Jobs" Czar Van Jones? Wasn't he a hoot?

LV

If the response to Obama's speech constitutes freaking out, then certainly accusing a president of breaking the law constitutes same. I don't know if what Bush did was illegal, but it was certainly politically calculated and lame.

"Help the president with his AGENDA?! "

Not what he was asking. Here is the context.

"If you take school seriously, you won't have to settle for a job, just any job. You'll have a career. If you make it your business to learn, one day you'll be a better parent. You may not think about it now, but one day your children will want to look up at you and say, ``I've got the smartest Mom and Dad in the world.'' Don't disappoint them.

Let me leave you with a simple message: Every time you walk through that classroom door, make it your mission to get a good education. Don't do it just because your parents, or even the President, tells you. Do it for yourselves. Do it for your future. And while you're at it, help a little brother or sister to learn, or maybe even Mom or Dad. Let me know how you're doing. Write me a letter -- and I'm serious about this one -- write me a letter about ways you can help us achieve our goals. I think you know the address."

"Our" refers to "Mom", "Dad", "little brother" "sister" and the students themselves, and explicitly DOES NOT refer to the president. Also, all he did was suggest the students write a letter. That is quite a bit different from crafting a curriculum at the federal level.

The suggestions for activities were not "curriculum crafted at the federal level." Take a look at any educational tool out there and you will see "suggestions for related activities." Why? Why are these suggestions included? Because teachers are under-paid, overworked and underaided, that's why. The letter writing activity wasn't required (as curriculum is). It was simply a suggestion of an activity that a teacher could do with her class, alter slightly and do with her class or disregard entirely. It is a tool, not curriculum. In fact, NASA has concocted tools designed around space launches that contain science and math work, the treasury department has tools to teach young children the value of certain coins and counting games. Is that "curriculum crafted at the federal level?"

The thug fringe talk comes from the Democratic press releases. They are making a concerted effort to discredit any opposition to Obama's plan by focusing on its most extreme elements.

Of course, that strategy would not include acknowledging the extremism on the liberal side, or the irony of decrying fringe talk while linking to Dailykos, which is the fringe gone mainstream.

Mr. Beiler, I too saw the Washington Examiner piece and like vp123 says, if this is true - and as a writer/reporter it is your job to check it out - then you need to offer an apology. i get frustrated with this era of moral equivalency which I hear all the time in our home - "Well he did it to me, so I did it to him." This is what passes for journalism and reporting and politics today, not substantive debate. And Mr. Beiler, please apologize for the final line of your piece. It violates all 3 of the comment codes of conduct named just below your article (or is that just for us who read the articles?). I agree that this Obama speech to the kids - mine included - is no big deal. Your article hurts far more than it helps the debate.

Since you mentioned the "thug fringe" and their "paranoid dystopian fantasies", what's your take on 9-11 Truther and "Green Jobs" Czar Van Jones? Wasn't he a hoot?

LV

If the response to Obama's speech constitutes freaking out, then certainly accusing a president of breaking the law constitutes same. I don't know if what Bush did was illegal, but it was certainly politically calculated and lame.

"Help the president with his AGENDA?! "

Not what he was asking. Here is the context.

"If you take school seriously, you won't have to settle for a job, just any job. You'll have a career. If you make it your business to learn, one day you'll be a better parent. You may not think about it now, but one day your children will want to look up at you and say, ``I've got the smartest Mom and Dad in the world.'' Don't disappoint them.

Let me leave you with a simple message: Every time you walk through that classroom door, make it your mission to get a good education. Don't do it just because your parents, or even the President, tells you. Do it for yourselves. Do it for your future. And while you're at it, help a little brother or sister to learn, or maybe even Mom or Dad. Let me know how you're doing. Write me a letter -- and I'm serious about this one -- write me a letter about ways you can help us achieve our goals. I think you know the address."

"Our" refers to "Mom", "Dad", "little brother" "sister" and the students themselves, and explicitly DOES NOT refer to the president. Also, all he did was suggest the students write a letter. That is quite a bit different from crafting a curriculum at the federal level.

The suggestions for activities were not "curriculum crafted at the federal level." Take a look at any educational tool out there and you will see "suggestions for related activities." Why? Why are these suggestions included? Because teachers are under-paid, overworked and underaided, that's why. The letter writing activity wasn't required (as curriculum is). It was simply a suggestion of an activity that a teacher could do with her class, alter slightly and do with her class or disregard entirely. It is a tool, not curriculum. In fact, NASA has concocted tools designed around space launches that contain science and math work, the treasury department has tools to teach young children the value of certain coins and counting games. Is that "curriculum crafted at the federal level?"

The thug fringe talk comes from the Democratic press releases. They are making a concerted effort to discredit any opposition to Obama's plan by focusing on its most extreme elements.

Of course, that strategy would not include acknowledging the extremism on the liberal side, or the irony of decrying fringe talk while linking to Dailykos, which is the fringe gone mainstream.

"That may take some time"

.11 seconds via Google News. Time, WaPo, MSNBC, Scripps News Service et al. ran the Gephardt quote. He said it. He said it about Bush. The end.

That may take some time, and it's simply not about checking facts but also putting them in the proper context. That is where my antennae went up.

That's how I can say that. Let me add that it's not happening on the "other side"; if it were the conservatives would be able to quote chapter-and-verse.

Yes, I can understand your concern as i have suspicions about certain media types myself. But in looking at the article again, it should be fairly easy to fact-check the assertions. If you are a journalist - and I have no reason to doubt it - check it out and let us know. Again, if that piece is true, then Mr. Beiler did not do his journalistic duty or homework.

Nothing like being impartial and non-partisan....

Exactly, vp. Beiler claims that past Republican presidents had done the same thing "without controversy." But:

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

Democrats did not stop with words. Rep. William Ford, then chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, ordered the General Accounting Office to investigate the cost and legality of Bush's appearance. On October 17, 1991, Ford summoned then-Education Secretary Lamar Alexander and other top Bush administration officials to testify at a hearing devoted to the speech. "The hearing this morning is to really examine the expenditure of $26,750 of the Department of Education funds to produce and televise an appearance by President Bush at Alice Deal Junior High School in Washington, DC," Ford began. "As the chairman of the committee charged with the authorization and implementation of education programs, I am very much interested in the justification, rationale for giving the White House scarce education funds to produce a media event."

Methinks that some apologies are in order.

What's not happening on the "other side"? Tell me what it is and I'll find you a chapter and verse between Google News and Sojo's blog roll.